Hi Richard, I sent a second version of the patch which shouldn't be racy. I have implemented it slightly differently from your suggestion because I think it is also a bit racy (if we start checking whether [email protected] is running in one thread only after it has already finished processing the coredump in the other thread, then we'll be stuck in a retry loop until the overall timeout).
Étienne On Mon, Jun 10, 2024 at 2:53 PM Richard Purdie < [email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, 2024-06-10 at 14:39 +0200, Etienne Cordonnier via > lists.openembedded.org wrote: > > From: Etienne Cordonnier <[email protected]> > > > > Fix this error where 'coredumpctl info' warns that the coredump is still > being > > processed: > > > > ``` > > AssertionError: 1 != 0 : MiniDebugInfo Test failed: No match found. > > -- Notice: 1 [email protected] unit is running, output may be > incomplete. > > ``` > > > > Signed-off-by: Etienne Cordonnier <[email protected]> > > --- > > meta/lib/oeqa/runtime/cases/systemd.py | 3 +++ > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/meta/lib/oeqa/runtime/cases/systemd.py > b/meta/lib/oeqa/runtime/cases/systemd.py > > index 80fdae240a..17fa660ace 100644 > > --- a/meta/lib/oeqa/runtime/cases/systemd.py > > +++ b/meta/lib/oeqa/runtime/cases/systemd.py > > @@ -155,6 +155,9 @@ class SystemdServiceTests(SystemdTest): > > self.target.run('kill -SEGV %s' % output) > > self.assertEqual(status, 0, msg = 'Not able to find process > that runs sleep, output : %s' % output) > > > > + # Give some time to [email protected] to process the > coredump > > + time.sleep(1) > > + > > (status, output) = self.target.run('coredumpctl info') > > self.assertEqual(status, 0, msg='MiniDebugInfo Test failed: %s' > % output) > > self.assertEqual('sleep_for_duration (busybox.nosuid' in output > or 'xnanosleep (sleep.coreutils' in output, > > > > Specific sleep values like this are a red flag, it all depends on how > much load systems are under and we've had a lot of problems with these > kinds of things. > > Instead, you should probably detect "[email protected] unit is > running" in the command output and retry if that is the case with an > overall timeout/error in case it never completes. > > Cheers, > > Richard >
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#200480): https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/200480 Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/106591401/21656 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
