From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: util-linux-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.17.20]:53646 "EHLO mout.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754921AbaEHU3T (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 May 2014 16:29:19 -0400 From: Ruediger Meier To: kerolasa@gmail.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] tests: make kill to go-around when /proc is not available Date: Thu, 8 May 2014 22:29:16 +0200 Cc: "util-linux" References: <1399482068-6460-1-git-send-email-kerolasa@iki.fi> <201405072212.12680.sweet_f_a@gmx.de> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Message-Id: <201405082229.16627.sweet_f_a@gmx.de> Sender: util-linux-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thursday 08 May 2014, Sami Kerola wrote: > On 7 May 2014 21:12, Ruediger Meier wrote: > > On Wednesday 07 May 2014, Sami Kerola wrote: > >> [PATCH] tests: make kill to go-around when /proc is not available > > > > Do you really want to get it work when whole /proc is not available > > or just if /proc/$pid/status is still missing? > > Hi Rudi, > > Right, sloppy from my side. The title should say 'if > /proc/$pid/status is missing'. Test to check availability of /proc > should be in test/functions.sh, and where /proc is missing should > gracefully bail out before starting signal helper. If /proc/$pid is > available, but not the status file then waiting is unlikely to help, > and opportunistic sleep is most likely the best option. Have you also noticed my other comments to the test code? > I'll write new change before Sunday. thanks, Rudi