[PATCH 1 of 2 STABLE] worker: be silent if killed by the main process

Augie Fackler raf at durin42.com
Fri Apr 21 15:41:39 EDT 2017


On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 09:06:44AM -0700, Jun Wu wrote:
> Excerpts from Yuya Nishihara's message of 2017-04-21 20:43:48 +0900:
> > Can't we simply move the SignalInterrupt handling to dispatch?
> > SignalInterrupt is a sub-type of KeyboardInterrupt, so it doesn't make
> > sense to handle only SignalInterrupt in scmutil.callcatch().
>
> Signal could arrive before scmutil.callcatch, just after os.fork().
>
> > I noticed "interrupted!" message isn't printed when worker is involved,
> > but that is a minor issue we don't have to fix in the stable release.
>
> The test fails constantly in our CI. But I can send V2 after freeze.
>
> > > Besides, it's hard to predicate how many "killed!" or traceback should be
> > > printed if we keep that behavior.
> >
> > Well, too many "killed!" messages are bad, but traceback is for developers.
> > I don't think it should be suppressed just for test stability.
> >
> > The default handler of SIGTERM kills the process, which shouldn't be used.
>
> The new plan is to use SIGUSR2 to "kill" workers, SIGUSR2 handler is to do
> sys.exit. So "killed!" is removed and traceback is kept.

Should we be planning to take these for 4.2, or wait and do them in early 4.3 cycle?

> _______________________________________________
> Mercurial-devel mailing list
> Mercurial-devel at mercurial-scm.org
> https://www.mercurial-scm.org/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel


More information about the Mercurial-devel mailing list