Re: [PATCH datacenter-manager 11/20] parallel fetcher: pass arguments to closure in a single type

["Lukas Wagner" <l.wagner@proxmox.com>]

On Fri Aug 21, 2026 at 4:00 PM CEST, Robert Obkircher wrote:
>> +
>> +extern "C" fn cleanup() {
>> +    if let Some(dir) = STATIC_TEMP_DIR.get() {
>> +        let _ = std::fs::remove_dir_all(dir);
>> +    }
>> +}
>> +
>> +pub fn test_setup() {
>> +    static INIT: Once = Once::new();
>> +
>> +    INIT.call_once(|| {
>> +        let file_opts = CreateOptions::new();
>> +
>> +        let dir = proxmox_sys::fs::make_tmp_dir("/tmp", None).unwrap();
>
> A while ago I had a brief discussion with Fabian about how file I/O
> should be tested. He argued that tests should not make any assumptions
> about the file system outside of CARGO_TARGET_TMPDIR, not even about
> /tmp.
>
> But that is only available for real integration tests, not for
> unittests.

Yeah, might make it sense to use it for the tests here, I guess.

Right now, we have quite a few unit tests in PDM which use /tmp anyways,
for exactly the reason you mentioned. Wondering if there is any sensible
approach for these.

>
>> +        STATIC_TEMP_DIR.set(dir.clone()).unwrap();
>> +
>> +        proxmox_rest_server::init_worker_tasks(dir.clone(), file_opts).unwrap();
>> +        proxmox_access_control::init::init(&pdm_api_types::AccessControlConfig, dir)
>> +            .expect("failed to setup access control config");
>> +
>> +        unsafe {
>> +            libc::atexit(cleanup);
>
> Doesn't this potentially delete files while other threads are stil
> accessing them?

Its a bit of a crutch admittedly, but I think in the context of integration tests
this should not be a huge issue? If exit() is called, any remaining
thread is stopped anyway; it should not be a big deal if any file IO in
the temporary directory fails then?

Admittedly, I haven't examined the exact behavior of rust's test runner,
so maybe I'm missing something here.