On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 4:38 PM, Namhyung Kim <namhy...@kernel.org> wrote:
> Hi Stephane,
>
> 2014-04-23 (수), 14:11 +0200, Stephane Eranian:
>> On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 8:40 AM, Namhyung Kim <namhy...@kernel.org> wrote:
>> > +out_child:
>> > + if (forks) {
>> > + int exit_status;
>> >
>> > - return 0;
>> > + if (!child_finished)
>> > + kill(rec->evlist->workload.pid, SIGTERM);
>> > +
>> > + wait(&exit_status);
>> > +
>> > + if (err < 0)
>> Not quite this. Although this works with my test case with 'false'.
>> It fails when I tried the opposite test case:
>>
>> $ perf record true && echo yes || echo no
>> [ perf record: Woken up 1 times to write data ]
>> [ perf record: Captured and wrote 0.013 MB perf.data (~589 samples) ]
>> no
>>
>> The return code in this case is 255. I tracked it down to err being last set
>> by poll() which got interrupted by SIGCHLD. So I think the err value must
>> be overridden somehow in this case. Maybe something like:
>>
>> err = poll(evsel_list->pollfd, evsel_list->nr_fds,
>> -1);
>> if (err < 0 && errno == EINTR && forks && done)
>> err = 0;
>
> Hmm.. just checking "err < 0 && errno == EINTR" isn't enough?
>
> And I guess the same problem can be occurred during record__mmap_read()
> as it calls record__write() which eventually calls ion() and it seems
> not to handle the above case.. I'll cook a patch for it too.
>
That's true.
Now, do we care about the return value of poll()?
> Thanks,
> Namhyung
>
>
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
