On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 12:13 PM Bjoern Walk <bwalk@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
diff --git a/src/util/virprocess.c b/src/util/virprocess.c index ecea27a2d4..46360cc051 100644 --- a/src/util/virprocess.c +++ b/src/util/virprocess.c @@ -341,15 +341,19 @@ int virProcessKill(pid_t pid, int sig) * Returns 0 if it was killed gracefully, 1 if it * was killed forcibly, -1 if it is still alive, * or another error occurred. + * + * Callers can proide an extra delay to wait longer + * than the default. */ int -virProcessKillPainfully(pid_t pid, bool force) +virProcessKillPainfullyDelay(pid_t pid, bool force, unsigned int extradelay) { size_t i; int ret = -1; + unsigned int delay = 75 + (extradelay*5); const char *signame = "TERM";
- VIR_DEBUG("vpid=%lld force=%d", (long long)pid, force); + VIR_DEBUG("vpid=%lld force=%d delay=%u", (long long)pid, force,
Christian Ehrhardt <christian.ehrhardt@canonical.com> [2018-08-14, 11:27AM +0200]: pid); ^ This probably should be delay, right?
Absolutely correct, bad old copy-pasta from the beginning of this change. Thanks for spotting it. Example is with 12 Devices passed through and force, which means with both patches applied: - raise base value to wait after kill by 30 seconds (force is set) - second patch - request 12*2 seconds extra for the devices - this patch That should be 200+(12*2*5)=320 and that matches what I see int he log: 2018-08-16 13:04:51.999+0000: 61243: debug : virProcessKillPainfullyDelay:359 : vpid=60939 force=1 delay=320 I'm not pushing a V2 just for the change, but I have it queued with the fixed variable. Any other feedback on this or the sibling patch? Especially since those aren't my usual apparmor changes I'd really want some more reviews/acks before considering a push. -- Christian Ehrhardt Software Engineer, Ubuntu Server Canonical Ltd