On Jul 14, 2025 / 11:16, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
> On 14.07.25 13:14, Shinichiro Kawasaki wrote:
> > On Jul 14, 2025 / 09:12, Daniel Wagner wrote:
> >> On Mon, Jul 14, 2025 at 07:09:39AM +0000, Shinichiro Kawasaki wrote:
> >>>> --- a/tests/loop/010
> >>>> +++ b/tests/loop/010
> >>>> @@ -78,5 +78,12 @@ test() {
> >>>> if _dmesg_since_test_start | grep --quiet "$grep_str"; then
> >>>> echo "Fail"
> >>>> fi
> >>>> +
> >>>> + # The repeated loop device creation and deletions generated so many udev
> >>>> + # events. Drain the events to not influence following test cases.
> >>>> + if systemctl is-active systemd-udevd.service >/dev/null; then
> >>>> + systemctl restart systemd-udevd.service
> >>>> + fi
> >>
> >> Maybe adding a warning if udev or a 'udevadm settle --timeout 900' would
> >> good when they system is not using systemd.
> >
> > That sounds a good idea to make the test case more robust. I will add the
> > helper function below to the v2 patch.
> >
> > _drain_udev_events() {
> > if command -v systemctl &>/dev/null && grep --quiet systemd-udevd < \
> > <(systemctl list-unit-files); then
> > systemctl restart systemd-udevd.serbice
>
> Btw you have a typo here: serbice -> service
Oops, thanks for the catch.
And now I think,
systemctl is-active --quiet systemd-udevd
is the better than,
grep --quiet systemd-udevd < <(systemctl list-unit-files)
Will revise it.
