GNU bug report logs - #27553
[PATCH shepherd] Register SIGCHLD handler after primitive fork

Previous Next

Full log

Message #11 received at 27553 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Jelle Licht <jlicht <at> fsfe.org>
To: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 27553 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#27553] [PATCH shepherd] Register SIGCHLD handler after
 primitive fork
Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2017 14:19:12 +0200

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Hi Ludo,

2017-07-12 23:34 GMT+02:00 Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>:

> Hi Jelle,
>
> Jelle Licht <jlicht <at> fsfe.org> skribis:
>
> > I am not sure if this is also the proper ML for the GNU Shepherd, but
> > looking in the archives lead me to believe it actually is. If not, I
> > suggest the gnu.org page for shepherd be updated with the correct info.
>
> It’s the right list.  :-)
>
I am glad it turned out to be :-). Perhaps [1] can be updated to the same
info as [2]?


>
> > I recently starting playing around with user shepherd, and found out that
> > when running a shepherd 0.3.2 daemonized as non-init process (via
> "(action
> > 'shepherd 'daemonize)"), zombie processes are created whenever you start
> > and subsequently stop any service.
> >
> > Thinking I did something wrong, I asked lfam on #guix to share his (very
> > helpful) init.scm for user shepherd, yet I still noticed the same
> behaviour.
> >
> > I believe commit `efa2f45c5f7dc735407381b7b8a83d6c37f828db'
> inadvertently
> > introduced an ordering issue, where the SIGCHLD handler is registered
> > /before/ shepherd has the chance to daemonize. I believe the following
> > trivial patch addresses this snafu.
>
> The config file can start services, so the SIGCHLD handler must be
> installed before we read the config file (otherwise we could be missing
> some process termination notifications.)
>
What do you mean exactly? I think my config file does this, and I have not
yet noticed this issue,
but I might just be confused about what you mean here.


>
> Perhaps a solution would be to install the SIGCHLD handler lazily upon
> the first ‘fork+exec-command’ call?  That would ensure both that (1)
> users have a chance to daemonize before the handler is installed, and
> (2) that the handler is installed before services are started.
>
> Thoughts?
>
This seems like it would be for the best. I actually have no clue how to
implement this though.

Regards,
Jelle

[1]: https://www.gnu.org/software/shepherd/
[2]: https://www.gnu.org/software/guix/about/#contact

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.