From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-yw1-x1134.google.com (mail-yw1-x1134.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::1134]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9C77E3858D33 for ; Tue, 28 Feb 2023 19:08:32 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 9C77E3858D33 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Received: by mail-yw1-x1134.google.com with SMTP id 00721157ae682-536cd8f6034so301254137b3.10 for ; Tue, 28 Feb 2023 11:08:32 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=RBdvgSSl1uoipj3Cs0GX1ivO4bHpS6mBqWagOIPMS1w=; b=m8YPzOLzyTItuJ97LU2z6qV9GLvMbHx1u0u2X0EuSS1RxRxx3QmDY86N8Ua/QTLIoK hxk59tKIYxHElbCT48NkVklg8YNCVLsXwfYk/0UWul9YRINa8uA2Qe0Jx0KYgxqnM2G5 0pOCY7CX33/2ACYn6V9cNjI1m0PTsFnLB0RXHMZnynXsQpPDl/cCNPOzb8ZOGzh2wtoV y6/ArmmQm/vcK/NRIKyXcjkbOC4PWspszdcAECR+vtWYh4/axehfW0o8LkFGZLFogzhT ddwJGylUj7VWPocCDqOJ6R8MkJAa9wGv6WiNgqzFjY07WGCb+/Zs3rZ56ICTVPuWc45C buvA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=RBdvgSSl1uoipj3Cs0GX1ivO4bHpS6mBqWagOIPMS1w=; b=XFRt8R45hudcxwbusFOAarsXy+K+reFDAlOiwHy3seV0dL1wJFf0dXqNLEadEOysMX ioMl7xnWkRidSxIZg8dcrlyU1WiEf7+i95La1bimjAxadXfmkze0Jzn2cnNjIvi7w/Sz k6N8OrV5EczgCfQkvDvO56lUD0eRpsMmXGFxDuHU5GGy4qj5RrsS8ho1WYDtIKRDFm9g bosmY3urU4NfXPeGJn723FhMUZcg69OL+WZQANa1q3+LRt0H9Apr30FdZ+V+g4G013Wu +BavPf2N0z/9JQaPKjmtR+XUt1GsJ5HUdnqztA3kclvAaMQclutZGPmL5S4myC+b/EPE p70A== X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKVz12cPwWD7GAtfOYUahRaYxy4PO2i67deNSkGuLdr37VFcWBC2 Y5zhWKpex1QHa7ul2KS47IKkfRngI/qQngXIntl2dL7opp4= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set8oGMHJ25+JCC46zgM/gKy21fmaKIUKvQjK+gkt+/5IsUK++himFWK/Ls97GuPLxuNbG9Ki8QQdeiKzax7dJMc= X-Received: by 2002:a81:ac5e:0:b0:52f:3399:ed08 with SMTP id z30-20020a81ac5e000000b0052f3399ed08mr2322546ywj.6.1677611310931; Tue, 28 Feb 2023 11:08:30 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20230112135853.3786675-1-adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org> <87y1ohll0i.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> <91e71cd8-b094-f8fe-6d60-b0a3386d6c6c@linaro.org> In-Reply-To: <91e71cd8-b094-f8fe-6d60-b0a3386d6c6c@linaro.org> From: "H.J. Lu" Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2023 11:07:55 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/6] Optimize posix_spawn signal setup with clone3 To: Adhemerval Zanella Netto Cc: Florian Weimer , "H.J. Lu via Libc-alpha" , "Carlos O'Donell" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3016.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_FROM,KAM_NUMSUBJECT,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,TXREP autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 10:16 AM Adhemerval Zanella Netto wrote: > > > > 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. In all cases, sa.sa_handler was SIG_IGN while SIG_DFL was expected. -- H.J.