On Tue, Feb 03, 2015 at 10:48:40AM +, Daniel Stone wrote:
> On 2 February 2015 at 09:40, Marek Chalupa wrote:
> > After running a test in fork, we were waiting for any child to terminate.
> > It is OK unless the child forks again. If the child calls fork, the waitid
> > can
> > catch the chil
On 2 February 2015 at 09:40, Marek Chalupa wrote:
> After running a test in fork, we were waiting for any child to terminate.
> It is OK unless the child forks again. If the child calls fork, the waitid can
> catch the child's child termination, stop block and run another test
> while the former t
Hi Marek,
That change looks good (I'll assume you've observed it improve behavior
in your use scenarios).
I seem to recall some ugliness in this general area when correcting
tests for some other project under Google test (daemon development,
signal masking and other such), but those should be sep
After running a test in fork, we were waiting for any child to terminate.
It is OK unless the child forks again. If the child calls fork, the waitid can
catch the child's child termination, stop block and run another test
while the former test is still running. This is racy i. e. when adding socket
