From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com> Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D19CA61BAF for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 18 Dec 2020 10:31:38 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id C72FE2E30E for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 18 Dec 2020 10:31:38 +0100 (CET) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com [212.186.127.180]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS id 58A3A2E301 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 18 Dec 2020 10:31:38 +0100 (CET) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 203FE45310 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 18 Dec 2020 10:31:38 +0100 (CET) To: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>, Dominik Csapak <d.csapak@proxmox.com> References: <20201217145018.2902-1-d.csapak@proxmox.com> From: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com> Message-ID: <61a1f4b6-77a7-86c5-bf26-7e6883e04de2@proxmox.com> Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2020 10:31:36 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:84.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/84.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20201217145018.2902-1-d.csapak@proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Language: en-GB Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -0.065 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED -2.3 Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/, medium trust SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [daemon.rs] Subject: [pbs-devel] applied: Re: [PATCH proxmox-backup v2] tools/daemon: improve reload behaviour X-BeenThere: pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion <pbs-devel.lists.proxmox.com> List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pbs-devel>, <mailto:pbs-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pbs-devel/> List-Post: <mailto:pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com> List-Help: <mailto:pbs-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pbs-devel>, <mailto:pbs-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2020 09:31:38 -0000 On 17/12/2020 15:50, Dominik Csapak wrote: > it seems that sometimes, the child process signal gets handled > before the parent process signal. Systemd then ignores the > childs signal (finished reloading) and only after going into > reloading state because of the parent. this will never finish. > > Instead, wait for the state to change to 'reloading' after sending > that signal in the parent, an only fork afterwards. This way > we ensure that systemd knows about the reloading before actually trying > to do it. > > Signed-off-by: Dominik Csapak <d.csapak@proxmox.com> > --- > changes from v1: > * introduce wait_service_is_(not_)state > it is a bit more generic > has a better name > * factor the common code out into get_service_state > > src/tools/daemon.rs | 45 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------- > 1 file changed, 28 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-) > > applied, with Fabians T-b, thanks!