Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43E7BC433FE for ; Fri, 3 Dec 2021 17:03:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1343544AbhLCRGr (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Dec 2021 12:06:47 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:32792 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S239612AbhLCRGq (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Dec 2021 12:06:46 -0500 Received: from mail-il1-x12a.google.com (mail-il1-x12a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::12a]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 21A96C061751 for ; Fri, 3 Dec 2021 09:03:22 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-il1-x12a.google.com with SMTP id t8so3340352ilu.8 for ; Fri, 03 Dec 2021 09:03:22 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linuxfoundation.org; s=google; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=cwxHCbenFCripjeUjs6tCpolH4DmLSPfSlC/W5NUvwU=; b=UnNTzVNfryaWbpSuR2ZXK+nlsa2MZJTa4qw0dhixOeol5VA8qCTVeaBL85KrdIkL2M Twn1uyUZc5mZ2z0osmLwcC8yI6DdCR2LM1V3n6rLOK9EK/g58rCAYcvnTYgsFgS1s+gW FkN7AC9w7HL1CzaP2wTyZdFSEU3Qp7dpU12f0= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=cwxHCbenFCripjeUjs6tCpolH4DmLSPfSlC/W5NUvwU=; b=ID/HpM59rSt470p5NBc386AWzksd7BdAo9vKogHjglMjj4k43nCzeHkrq+we+JWvYP 2QirALxczmsPwB1a+50hX5Etc2a4YlqrR3pzdsEBua7v+Vld6IKK9SaK3JB9OCzU+vhx I0RNdErSXoAVw9jouFk7YwX7KUPXVPIEKyWKL3Maj5d3wYQqcsnpaSgxSByuHwbzx2R8 sRKgeMcD2pK6jBBnEY9NF6iEh0XEiTD+gUI2U7NUv9/WuPrPwQhXTrQmT8vJltP4o19U Is69SJ7oDRO1XMU0pgpRFIDqBNgIMApdptCDiQchyn3708PfNhmdXIQl0rIOFSe/OKNe S2sA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532mfbQSKHz4sBuYR7/xK04wGm7RiLTXDMWBkyzDLMxIicseqIoK s9wCMyXUIhvcxzFNJ2hC2ZgQgQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyZpS6sg5hnDg8ut0BnNoPlbIah10gQ/bDD44Dxcz9yDYWQ02+U2Hjt9Wnr7/U6Hb7nYednLA== X-Received: by 2002:a92:c244:: with SMTP id k4mr18431483ilo.169.1638551001558; Fri, 03 Dec 2021 09:03:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.112] (c-24-9-64-241.hsd1.co.comcast.net. [24.9.64.241]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a25sm1811479ioa.24.2021.12.03.09.03.20 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 03 Dec 2021 09:03:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ksefltest: pidfd: Fix wait_states: Test terminated by timeout To: Christian Brauner , Li Zhijian Cc: linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, shuah@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Christian Brauner , Philip Li , kernel test robot , Shuah Khan References: <20211029024528.8086-1-lizhijian@cn.fujitsu.com> <20211029024528.8086-2-lizhijian@cn.fujitsu.com> <20211029083248.7vttuxbwbtdylrnq@wittgenstein> From: Shuah Khan Message-ID: Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2021 10:03:20 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.8.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20211029083248.7vttuxbwbtdylrnq@wittgenstein> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 10/29/21 2:32 AM, Christian Brauner wrote: > On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 10:45:28AM +0800, Li Zhijian wrote: >> 0Day/LKP observed that the kselftest blocks foever since one of the >> pidfd_wait doesn't terminate in 1 of 30 runs. After digging into >> the source, we found that it blocks at: >> ASSERT_EQ(sys_waitid(P_PIDFD, pidfd, &info, WCONTINUED, NULL), 0); >> >> we can reproduce it by: >> $ while true; do make run_tests -C pidfd; done >> >> a delay to ensure that the parent can see child process WCONTINUED. >> >> CC: Christian Brauner >> CC: Shuah Khan >> CC: Philip Li >> Reported-by: kernel test robot >> Signed-off-by: Li Zhijian >> --- > > Not a fan of the usleep() solution but if it fixes it it's fine for > a test, I think. > Acked-by: Christian Brauner > I don't like introducing usleep() which will increase the kselftest run-time. Every little bit adds up if we allow usleep() in tests. thanks, -- Shuah