lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Mar]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 6/6] clone4: Introduce new CLONE_FD flag to get task exit notification via fd
Date
On Saturday 14 March 2015 15:03:08 Josh Triplett wrote:
> I had to think about this for a while, but I think it makes sense now.
> wait should *not* ever return the PID of an autoreaped process, because
> that would introduce a race condition (the caller cannot safely do
> *anything* with the PID of an autoreaped process, since by the time it
> does, the process may be gone and the PID may be reused). However, that
> doesn't mean wait cannot block on the process, and then subsequently
> wake up and return -ECHILD (or keep waiting on some other child process
> if there is one). That's apparently the semantic used with SA_NOCLDWAIT
> or if you have SIGCHLD set to SIG_IGN, and matching that seems
> appropriate.
>
> Thiago, could your QProcess implementation handle that modified autoreap
> semantic? The downside there is that if your calling process has a
> process-wide loop that waits for all processes (and explicitly passes
> the Linux-specific __WCLONE or __WALL flag, since your processes
> launched with a 0 signal would count as "clone" children), they'd get
> back the processes you launch, too. (That would happen with your
> userspace-emulated version too for calls *without* __WCLONE or __WALL.)
> You'd still get the exit status you need via the clonefd, without a
> race, and you wouldn't need to touch process-wide signal handling, so I
> think this should still work and avoid any races.

I don't see why QProcess would have a problem. We don't have such a process-
wide wait loop with __WCLONE or __WALL and I can't think of any reason why
someone would do that and still expect NPTL to work. Or, put another way, if
they are using clone/clone4 directly and bypassing NPTL, they're probably in a
very specialised process that has no business running QProcess in the first
place. I wouldn't be too worried.

Inside glibc itself, __WCLONE is used only in unit tests and __WALL is used in
a loop in elf/pldd.c, which is an independent application. Bionic has __WCLONE
in tests only too.

--
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-03-14 23:41    [W:0.094 / U:0.448 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site