From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gorcunov@gmail.com>
Received: from mail-lf1-f68.google.com (mail-lf1-f68.google.com
 [209.85.167.68])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by dev.tarantool.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A2FD146970F
 for <tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org>;
 Sat, 30 Nov 2019 01:36:53 +0300 (MSK)
Received: by mail-lf1-f68.google.com with SMTP id l18so5607784lfc.1
 for <tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org>;
 Fri, 29 Nov 2019 14:36:53 -0800 (PST)
Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2019 01:36:50 +0300
From: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20191129223650.GO19879@uranus>
References: <20191128204512.19732-1-gorcunov@gmail.com>
 <20191128204512.19732-2-gorcunov@gmail.com>
 <20191129055939.GH15149@atlas> <20191129094059.GA19879@uranus>
 <20191129111903.GA7760@atlas> <20191129113659.GE19879@uranus>
 <20191129145028.GA18043@atlas> <20191129151410.GJ19879@uranus>
 <20191129183144.GB16921@atlas> <20191129191708.GN19879@uranus>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20191129191708.GN19879@uranus>
Subject: Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH 1/5] popen: Introduce a backend
	engine
List-Id: Tarantool development patches <tarantool-patches.dev.tarantool.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.tarantool.org/mailman/options/tarantool-patches>, 
 <mailto:tarantool-patches-request@dev.tarantool.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.tarantool.org/pipermail/tarantool-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tarantool-patches-request@dev.tarantool.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.tarantool.org/mailman/listinfo/tarantool-patches>, 
 <mailto:tarantool-patches-request@dev.tarantool.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Konstantin Osipov <kostja.osipov@gmail.com>
Cc: tml <tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org>

On Fri, Nov 29, 2019 at 10:17:08PM +0300, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> > 
> > We discussed this and pid reuse is impossible unless you collect
> > the status of a child. You can easily mark the handle as dead as
> > soon as you get sigchild and collect it. I don't see any issue
> > here. 
> 
> The eio reaps children itself, ie calls for wait. Thus imagine a situation,
> we start killing the process like
> 
> popen_kill(handle)
> 	...
> 	kill(handle->pid)
> 	...
> 
> but before we reach kill() this process exited by self or killed
> by a user on the node. The signal handler sets pid = -1 and we
> call kill(-1). Which is wrong of course.

You know, without signal blocking I fear we simply won't be able
to tack children properly. Look here is an example

	pid = vfork();
	if (pid == 0) {
		_exit(1);

		here sigchld already delivered to the libev
		and it reaped it, vanishing from the system
		so that anyother application can reuse it
	} else {
		ev_child_init(&handle->ev_sigchld, ev_sigchld_cb, pid, 0);
		ev_child_start(EV_DEFAULT_ &handle->ev_sigchld);

		but pid already dead and reused by someone else,
		as I said wait() called under the hood, we simply
		don't control it
	}

and without signal blocking we can't order pid livetime anyhow.
You know in my first versions I setup ev_child_init with pid=0
and been expecting the sgnal handler catches _any_ sigchld but
it didn't work :/ Thus early _exit(1) in child process was
simply invisible to the rest of tarantool code.