Skip to content

lslocks: don't abort gathering per-process information even if opening a /proc/[0-9]* fails#2953

Merged
karelzak merged 2 commits into
util-linux:masterfrom
masatake:lslocks--no-sleep-in-test-case
Apr 15, 2024
Merged

lslocks: don't abort gathering per-process information even if opening a /proc/[0-9]* fails#2953
karelzak merged 2 commits into
util-linux:masterfrom
masatake:lslocks--no-sleep-in-test-case

Conversation

@masatake

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

If a process ($pid) taking a lock is gone while running lslocks,
gathering per-process information for the process may fail in opening
/proc/$pid. Though lslocks should work with incomplete information,
the original code stopped gathering per-process information for the
other processes.

As a result of the original behavior, tests/ts/lslocks/lslocks really
failed in an environment where multiple test cases ran simultaneously.

Close #2624 again.
See also #2633.

…g a /proc/[0-9]* fails

If a process ($pid) taking a lock is gone while running lslocks,
gathering per-process information for the process may fail in opening
/proc/$pid. Though lslocks should work with incomplete information,
the original code stopped gathering per-process information for the
other processes.

As a result of the original behavior, tests/ts/lslocks/lslocks really
failed in an environment where multiple test cases ran simultaneously.

Close util-linux#2624 again.
See also util-linux#2633.

Signed-off-by: Masatake YAMATO <yamato@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Masatake YAMATO <yamato@redhat.com>
@karelzak karelzak merged commit 01fb5ec into util-linux:master Apr 15, 2024
@masatake

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

This can be applicable to the stable branch. Let me know if I should make a pull request for the branch.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

lslocks: failed test

2 participants