Re: [PATCH v4 0/6] Optimize posix_spawn signal setup with clone3

[Adhemerval Zanella Netto <adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org>]

On 28/02/23 15:09, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * H. J. Lu via Libc-alpha:
> 
>> On x86-64, I am getting
>>
>> error: tst-spawn7.c:55: not true: sa.sa_handler == SIG_DFL
>> tst-spawn7.c:91: numeric comparison failure
>>    left: 1 (0x1); from: WEXITSTATUS (status)
>>   right: 0 (0x0); from: 0
>> error: tst-spawn7.c:55: not true: sa.sa_handler == SIG_DFL
>> tst-spawn7.c:91: numeric comparison failure
>>    left: 1 (0x1); from: WEXITSTATUS (status)
>>   right: 0 (0x0); from: 0
>> error: tst-spawn7.c:71: not true: sa.sa_handler == SIG_DFL
>> tst-spawn7.c:91: numeric comparison failure
>>    left: 1 (0x1); from: WEXITSTATUS (status)
>>   right: 0 (0x0); from: 0
>> error: tst-spawn7.c:55: not true: sa.sa_handler == SIG_DFL
>> tst-spawn7.c:91: numeric comparison failure
>>    left: 1 (0x1); from: WEXITSTATUS (status)
>>   right: 0 (0x0); from: 0
>> error: 4 test failures
>> FAIL: posix/tst-spawn7
>>
>> with
>>
>> $ make check -j12
>>
>> But it passes when I run it by hand.  Is this expected?
> 
> I see it as well, but it's not consistent for me, either.  Could it be a
> make bug, leaking unusual handler dispositions in some cases?  The test
> should probably check that the disposition are as expected at the start,
> and not incorrect to begin with.

Right, it makes sense. I will add some improvement to have a consistent signal
handling disposition prior spawn the tests processes.