On Thu, Apr 30, 2026 at 09:31:42AM -0700, Dave Jiang wrote: > > > On 4/29/26 7:18 PM, Alison Schofield wrote: > > This test verifies that wait-sanitize blocks for the programmed > > timeout after issuing sanitize on an inactive memdev. > > > > The sanitize request is issued in the background and wait-sanitize > > is called immediately after. In cxl_test, sanitize completes > > asynchronously via delayed work, and the sysfs write does not block. > > This creates a race where wait-sanitize may run before sanitize is > > observed and return immediately. > > > > This test has been reliable since its introduction, but recently > > started failing consistently in one environment, suggesting a > > timing sensitivity. It fails here: > > > > ((SECONDS > start + 2)) || err $LINENO > > > > Add a short delay after backgrounding the sanitize write to make > > sure that wait-sanitize can observe the in-progress operation. > > > > A sysfs-based synchronization was considered, but no in-progress > > state is exposed to user space. > > > > Signed-off-by: Alison Schofield <[email protected]> > > Looks reasonable > > Reviewed-by: Dave Jiang <[email protected]>
Thanks! Applied to: https://github.com/pmem/ndctl/tree/pending
