Re: [Gluster-devel] GF_PARENT_DOWN on SIGKILL

2016-07-25 Thread Jeff Darcy
> As far as I know, there's no explicit guarantee on the order in which > fini is called, so we cannot rely on it to do cleanup because ec needs > that all its underlying xlators be fully functional to finish the cleanup. What kind of cleanup are we talking about here? We already need to handle

Re: [Gluster-devel] GF_PARENT_DOWN on SIGKILL

2016-07-25 Thread Vijay Bellur
On 07/25/2016 02:41 AM, Xavier Hernandez wrote: Hi Jeff, On 22/07/16 15:37, Jeff Darcy wrote: Gah! sorry sorry, I meant to send the mail as SIGTERM. Not SIGKILL. So xavi and I were wondering why cleanup_and_exit() is not sending GF_PARENT_DOWN event. OK, then that grinding sound you hear is

Re: [Gluster-devel] GF_PARENT_DOWN on SIGKILL

2016-07-25 Thread Xavier Hernandez
Hi Jeff, On 22/07/16 15:37, Jeff Darcy wrote: Gah! sorry sorry, I meant to send the mail as SIGTERM. Not SIGKILL. So xavi and I were wondering why cleanup_and_exit() is not sending GF_PARENT_DOWN event. OK, then that grinding sound you hear is my brain shifting gears. ;) It seems that

Re: [Gluster-devel] GF_PARENT_DOWN on SIGKILL

2016-07-22 Thread Pranith Kumar Karampuri
On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 7:07 PM, Jeff Darcy wrote: > > Gah! sorry sorry, I meant to send the mail as SIGTERM. Not SIGKILL. So > xavi > > and I were wondering why cleanup_and_exit() is not sending GF_PARENT_DOWN > > event. > > OK, then that grinding sound you hear is my brain

Re: [Gluster-devel] GF_PARENT_DOWN on SIGKILL

2016-07-22 Thread Jeff Darcy
> Gah! sorry sorry, I meant to send the mail as SIGTERM. Not SIGKILL. So xavi > and I were wondering why cleanup_and_exit() is not sending GF_PARENT_DOWN > event. OK, then that grinding sound you hear is my brain shifting gears. ;) It seems that cleanup_and_exit will call xlator.fini in some

Re: [Gluster-devel] GF_PARENT_DOWN on SIGKILL

2016-07-22 Thread Pranith Kumar Karampuri
http://review.gluster.org/14980, this is where we have all the context about why I sent out this mail. Basically the tests were failing because umount is racing with version-updation xattrop. While I fixed the test to handle that race, xavi was wondering why GF_PARENT_DOWN event didn't come. I

Re: [Gluster-devel] GF_PARENT_DOWN on SIGKILL

2016-07-22 Thread Pranith Kumar Karampuri
It is only calling fini() apart from that not much. On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 6:36 PM, Pranith Kumar Karampuri < pkara...@redhat.com> wrote: > Gah! sorry sorry, I meant to send the mail as SIGTERM. Not SIGKILL. So > xavi and I were wondering why cleanup_and_exit() is not sending > GF_PARENT_DOWN

Re: [Gluster-devel] GF_PARENT_DOWN on SIGKILL

2016-07-22 Thread Pranith Kumar Karampuri
Gah! sorry sorry, I meant to send the mail as SIGTERM. Not SIGKILL. So xavi and I were wondering why cleanup_and_exit() is not sending GF_PARENT_DOWN event. On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 6:24 PM, Jeff Darcy wrote: > > Does anyone know why GF_PARENT_DOWN is not triggered on SIGKILL?

Re: [Gluster-devel] GF_PARENT_DOWN on SIGKILL

2016-07-22 Thread Jeff Darcy
> Does anyone know why GF_PARENT_DOWN is not triggered on SIGKILL? It will give > a chance for xlators to do any cleanup they need to do. For example ec can > complete the delayed xattrops. Nothing is triggered on SIGKILL. SIGKILL is explicitly defined to terminate a process *immediately*.

[Gluster-devel] GF_PARENT_DOWN on SIGKILL

2016-07-22 Thread Pranith Kumar Karampuri
Does anyone know why GF_PARENT_DOWN is not triggered on SIGKILL? It will give a chance for xlators to do any cleanup they need to do. For example ec can complete the delayed xattrops. -- Pranith ___ Gluster-devel mailing list Gluster-devel@gluster.org