Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2017 08:35:57 -0700 From: Alfred Perlstein <alfred@freebsd.org> To: Jilles Tjoelker <jilles@stack.nl> Cc: Ngie Cooper <yaneurabeya@gmail.com>, Brooks Davis <brooks@freebsd.org>, "freebsd-testing@freebsd.org" <freebsd-testing@freebsd.org>, "freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org" <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>, Alan Somers <asomers@freebsd.org>, "bdrewery@freebsd.org" <bdrewery@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: racy tests Message-ID: <9478F48E-4619-49F2-A9D8-34335C4A13AA@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <20170427152926.GA88843@stack.nl> References: <20170425230247.GA8201@spindle.one-eyed-alien.net> <CAGHfRMD9DtJOXugffdpXwNjg-XaUE6%2BOW-gCU56Rb8STjDu7aA@mail.gmail.com> <878d2f79-df2d-0c6c-bd21-c0e663160f45@freebsd.org> <20170427152926.GA88843@stack.nl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On Apr 27, 2017, at 8:29 AM, Jilles Tjoelker <jilles@stack.nl> wrote: >=20 >> On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 05:47:11AM -0700, Alfred Perlstein wrote: >> Can't something similar to this be done? >=20 >> .(05:40:37)(bright@elvis.mu.org) >> ~ % mkfifo derp >> .(05:43:46)(bright@elvis.mu.org) >> ~ % cat derp & >> [1] 59244 >> .(05:43:53)(bright@elvis.mu.org) >> ~ % ( pwait $! && echo "$?" > ex_status )& >> [2] 59263 >> .(05:44:28)(bright@elvis.mu.org) >> ~ % echo "hi" >> derp && echo "exit status: $(cat ex_status)" >> hi >> [2] + done ( pwait $! && echo "$?" > ex_status; ) >> [1] + done cat derp >> exit status: 0 >=20 >> Make a fifo, lodge a cat(1) process waiting for data, pwait in the >> background and stuff pwait's status into a file, then unstick the >> cat(1) by writing to the fifo, and then read the exit status from >> pwait from the file? >=20 > Fifos are indeed a good idea. They are used various times in the /bin/sh > tests, which should not wait for any sleeps in successful test runs (my > main motivation for this is to be able to run the whole suite in a few > seconds). >=20 > In this case, however, the -t option being tested is inherently related > to time. It would be possible to cheat by passing a very long timeout > and cut it short by sending SIGALRM using kill (which depends on the > concrete implementation). Makes sense. I was worried this was the case but I couldn't find any useful d= ocs on atf commands via google and man(3) on a 10.3 system. Thank you, your i= dea makes sense.=20 >=20 > --=20 > Jilles Tjoelker >=20
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?9478F48E-4619-49F2-A9D8-34335C4A13AA>