2:15 p.m.
Hi.
well, I'm not sure that this patch have the behavior that is it hope. You have the
word.
But when monitor_quit is call and the process not exists, this remains in loop and not
allow signal.
I try it with Monitor Task and nothing.
I had to reboot
8:42 a.m.
On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 03:15:43PM -0500, Ariel Barria wrote:
Hi.
well, I'm not sure that this patch have the behavior that is it hope. You have the
word.
But when monitor_quit is call and the process not exists, this remains in loop and not
allow signal.
I try it with Monitor Task and nothing.
I had to reboot
Thanks a lot, Ariel, this is quite a bad bug. The concept is good, but
can you change the patch a little?
instead of:
if (error != EINTR) {
kill()
if (error == ESRCH || error == ECHILD) {
killed = true;
}
}
I would use:
if (error == ECHILD) {
/* Skip this process */
killed = true;
} else if (error != EINTR) {
/* Keep the block with the kill function around */
}
Also, are you sure about the ESRCH error code? The waitpid man page only
mentions ECHILD..
11:48 a.m.
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2012 15:42:59 +0100
From: jhrozek(a)redhat.com
To: sssd-devel(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
Subject: Re: [SSSD] [PATCH] when monitor_quit is call and the process not exists
On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 03:15:43PM -0500, Ariel Barria wrote:
>
> Hi.
> well, I'm not sure that this patch have the behavior that is it hope. You have
the word.
> But when monitor_quit is call and the process not exists, this remains in loop and
not allow signal.
> I try it with Monitor Task and nothing.
> I had to reboot
Thanks a lot, Ariel, this is quite a bad bug. The concept is good, but
can you change the patch a little?
instead of:
if (error != EINTR) {
kill()
if (error == ESRCH || error == ECHILD) {
killed = true;
}
}
OK.
I would use:
if (error == ECHILD) {
/* Skip this process */
killed = true;
} else if (error != EINTR) {
/* Keep the block with the kill function around */
}
Also, are you sure about the ESRCH error code? The waitpid man page
only
mentions ECHILD..
well, really not is waipit.
For example 1
(Thu Nov 22 10:17:44 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0040): Returned with: 1
(Thu Nov 22 10:17:44 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Terminating [pam][7494]
(Thu Nov 22 10:17:44 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Couldn't kill [pam][7494]:
[3] [No such process] *********
(Thu Nov 22 10:17:44 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0010): [10][No child processes] while
waiting for [pam] ****waitpid
(Thu Nov 22 10:17:44 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Terminating [ssh][7493]
(Thu Nov 22 10:17:44 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Couldn't kill [ssh][7493]:
[3] [No such process]
(Thu Nov 22 10:17:44 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0010): [10][No child processes] while
waiting for [ssh]
(Thu Nov 22 10:17:44 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Terminating [nss][7492]
(Thu Nov 22 10:17:44 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Couldn't kill [nss][7492]:
[3] [No such process]
(Thu Nov 22 10:17:44 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0010): [10][No child processes] while
waiting for [nss]
(Thu Nov 22 10:17:44 2012) [sssd] [sbus_remove_watch] (0x2000): 0x9ee5f0/0x9f1430
I think that if the process not exists, is not necessary waitpit. you is agree?
Based on this, the result would be:
Example 2
Returned with: 1
(Thu Nov 22 12:42:37 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Terminating [nss][27350]
(Thu Nov 22 12:42:37 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Couldn't kill [nss][27350]:
[No such process]
(Thu Nov 22 12:42:37 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Terminating [ssh][27349]
(Thu Nov 22 12:42:37 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Couldn't kill [ssh][27349]:
[No such process]
(Thu Nov 22 12:42:37 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Terminating [pam][27348]
(Thu Nov 22 12:42:37 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Couldn't kill [pam][27348]:
[No such process]
(Thu Nov 22 12:42:37 2012) [sssd] [sbus_remove_watch] (0x2000): 0x237a080/0x237beb0
otherwise (only ECHILD), the result would be how the first example.
new patch.
Thanks.
_______________________________________________
sssd-devel mailing list
sssd-devel(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/sssd-devel
8:10 a.m.
On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 12:48:25PM -0500, Ariel Barria wrote:
> Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2012 15:42:59 +0100
> From: jhrozek(a)redhat.com
> To: sssd-devel(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
> Subject: Re: [SSSD] [PATCH] when monitor_quit is call and the process not exists
>
> On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 03:15:43PM -0500, Ariel Barria wrote:
> >
> > Hi.
> > well, I'm not sure that this patch have the behavior that is it hope. You
have the word.
> > But when monitor_quit is call and the process not exists, this remains in loop
and not allow signal.
> > I try it with Monitor Task and nothing.
> > I had to reboot
>
> Thanks a lot, Ariel, this is quite a bad bug. The concept is good, but
> can you change the patch a little?
>
> instead of:
> if (error != EINTR) {
> kill()
> if (error == ESRCH || error == ECHILD) {
> killed = true;
> }
> }
OK.
> I would use:
> if (error == ECHILD) {
> /* Skip this process */
> killed = true;
> } else if (error != EINTR) {
> /* Keep the block with the kill function around */
> }
>
> Also, are you sure about the ESRCH error code? The waitpid man page only
> mentions ECHILD..
well, really not is waipit.
For example 1
(Thu Nov 22 10:17:44 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0040): Returned with: 1
(Thu Nov 22 10:17:44 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Terminating [pam][7494]
(Thu Nov 22 10:17:44 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Couldn't kill [pam][7494]:
[3] [No such process] *********
(Thu Nov 22 10:17:44 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0010): [10][No child processes] while
waiting for [pam] ****waitpid
(Thu Nov 22 10:17:44 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Terminating [ssh][7493]
(Thu Nov 22 10:17:44 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Couldn't kill [ssh][7493]:
[3] [No such process]
(Thu Nov 22 10:17:44 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0010): [10][No child processes] while
waiting for [ssh]
(Thu Nov 22 10:17:44 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Terminating [nss][7492]
(Thu Nov 22 10:17:44 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Couldn't kill [nss][7492]:
[3] [No such process]
(Thu Nov 22 10:17:44 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0010): [10][No child processes] while
waiting for [nss]
(Thu Nov 22 10:17:44 2012) [sssd] [sbus_remove_watch] (0x2000): 0x9ee5f0/0x9f1430
I think that if the process not exists, is not necessary waitpit. you is agree?
Based on this, the result would be:
Example 2
Returned with: 1
(Thu Nov 22 12:42:37 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Terminating [nss][27350]
(Thu Nov 22 12:42:37 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Couldn't kill
[nss][27350]: [No such process]
(Thu Nov 22 12:42:37 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Terminating [ssh][27349]
(Thu Nov 22 12:42:37 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Couldn't kill
[ssh][27349]: [No such process]
(Thu Nov 22 12:42:37 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Terminating [pam][27348]
(Thu Nov 22 12:42:37 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Couldn't kill
[pam][27348]: [No such process]
(Thu Nov 22 12:42:37 2012) [sssd] [sbus_remove_watch] (0x2000): 0x237a080/0x237beb0
otherwise (only ECHILD), the result would be how the first example.
I don't think having that extra line really matters, it's just a DEBUG
message (and only in the case when the configuration is wrong anyway).
What about the attached patch? It's the one you sent earlier with a
modification. Would you agree with that version? Would it fix the
problem for you?
8:31 a.m.
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2012 15:10:17 +0100
From: jhrozek(a)redhat.com
To: sssd-devel(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
Subject: Re: [SSSD] [PATCH] when monitor_quit is call and the process not exists
On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 12:48:25PM -0500, Ariel Barria wrote:
> Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2012 15:42:59 +0100
> From: jhrozek(a)redhat.com
> To: sssd-devel(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
> Subject: Re: [SSSD] [PATCH] when monitor_quit is call and the process not exists
>
> On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 03:15:43PM -0500, Ariel Barria wrote:
> >
> > Hi.
> > well, I'm not sure that this patch have the behavior that is it hope. You
have the word.
> > But when monitor_quit is call and the process not exists, this remains in loop
and not allow signal.
> > I try it with Monitor Task and nothing.
> > I had to reboot
>
> Thanks a lot, Ariel, this is quite a bad bug. The concept is good, but
> can you change the patch a little?
>
> instead of:
> if (error != EINTR) {
> kill()
> if (error == ESRCH || error == ECHILD) {
> killed = true;
> }
> }
OK.
> I would use:
> if (error == ECHILD) {
> /* Skip this process */
> killed = true;
> } else if (error != EINTR) {
> /* Keep the block with the kill function around */
> }
>
> Also, are you sure about the ESRCH error code? The waitpid man page only
> mentions ECHILD..
well, really not is waipit.
For example 1
(Thu Nov 22 10:17:44 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0040): Returned with: 1
(Thu Nov 22 10:17:44 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Terminating [pam][7494]
(Thu Nov 22 10:17:44 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Couldn't kill [pam][7494]:
[3] [No such process] *********
(Thu Nov 22 10:17:44 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0010): [10][No child processes] while
waiting for [pam] ****waitpid
(Thu Nov 22 10:17:44 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Terminating [ssh][7493]
(Thu Nov 22 10:17:44 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Couldn't kill [ssh][7493]:
[3] [No such process]
(Thu Nov 22 10:17:44 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0010): [10][No child processes] while
waiting for [ssh]
(Thu Nov 22 10:17:44 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Terminating [nss][7492]
(Thu Nov 22 10:17:44 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Couldn't kill [nss][7492]:
[3] [No such process]
(Thu Nov 22 10:17:44 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0010): [10][No child processes] while
waiting for [nss]
(Thu Nov 22 10:17:44 2012) [sssd] [sbus_remove_watch] (0x2000): 0x9ee5f0/0x9f1430
I think that if the process not exists, is not necessary waitpit. you is agree?
Based on this, the result would be:
Example 2
Returned with: 1
(Thu Nov 22 12:42:37 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Terminating [nss][27350]
(Thu Nov 22 12:42:37 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Couldn't kill
[nss][27350]: [No such process]
(Thu Nov 22 12:42:37 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Terminating [ssh][27349]
(Thu Nov 22 12:42:37 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Couldn't kill
[ssh][27349]: [No such process]
(Thu Nov 22 12:42:37 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Terminating [pam][27348]
(Thu Nov 22 12:42:37 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Couldn't kill
[pam][27348]: [No such process]
(Thu Nov 22 12:42:37 2012) [sssd] [sbus_remove_watch] (0x2000): 0x237a080/0x237beb0
otherwise (only ECHILD), the result would be how the first example.
I don't think having that extra line really matters, it's just a DEBUG
message (and only in the case when the configuration is wrong anyway).
What about the attached patch? It's the one you sent earlier with a
modification. Would you agree with that version? Would it fix the
problem for you?
Yes, this fix the problem :)
Thanks for comments and your time.
_______________________________________________
sssd-devel mailing list
sssd-devel(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/sssd-devel
8:35 a.m.
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 09:31:29AM -0500, Ariel Barria wrote:
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2012 15:10:17 +0100
From: jhrozek(a)redhat.com
To: sssd-devel(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
Subject: Re: [SSSD] [PATCH] when monitor_quit is call and the process not exists
On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 12:48:25PM -0500, Ariel Barria wrote:
>
>
>
> > Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2012 15:42:59 +0100
> > From: jhrozek(a)redhat.com
> > To: sssd-devel(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
> > Subject: Re: [SSSD] [PATCH] when monitor_quit is call and the process not
exists
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 03:15:43PM -0500, Ariel Barria wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi.
> > > well, I'm not sure that this patch have the behavior that is it hope.
You have the word.
> > > But when monitor_quit is call and the process not exists, this remains in
loop and not allow signal.
> > > I try it with Monitor Task and nothing.
> > > I had to reboot
> >
> > Thanks a lot, Ariel, this is quite a bad bug. The concept is good, but
> > can you change the patch a little?
> >
> > instead of:
> > if (error != EINTR) {
> > kill()
> > if (error == ESRCH || error == ECHILD) {
> > killed = true;
> > }
> > }
>
>
> OK.
>
> > I would use:
> > if (error == ECHILD) {
> > /* Skip this process */
> > killed = true;
> > } else if (error != EINTR) {
> > /* Keep the block with the kill function around */
> > }
> >
>
>
> > Also, are you sure about the ESRCH error code? The waitpid man page only
> > mentions ECHILD..
>
>
> well, really not is waipit.
> For example 1
> (Thu Nov 22 10:17:44 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0040): Returned with: 1
> (Thu Nov 22 10:17:44 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Terminating [pam][7494]
> (Thu Nov 22 10:17:44 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Couldn't kill
[pam][7494]: [3] [No such process] *********
> (Thu Nov 22 10:17:44 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0010): [10][No child processes]
while waiting for [pam] ****waitpid
> (Thu Nov 22 10:17:44 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Terminating [ssh][7493]
> (Thu Nov 22 10:17:44 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Couldn't kill
[ssh][7493]: [3] [No such process]
> (Thu Nov 22 10:17:44 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0010): [10][No child processes]
while waiting for [ssh]
> (Thu Nov 22 10:17:44 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Terminating [nss][7492]
> (Thu Nov 22 10:17:44 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Couldn't kill
[nss][7492]: [3] [No such process]
> (Thu Nov 22 10:17:44 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0010): [10][No child processes]
while waiting for [nss]
> (Thu Nov 22 10:17:44 2012) [sssd] [sbus_remove_watch] (0x2000): 0x9ee5f0/0x9f1430
>
> I think that if the process not exists, is not necessary waitpit. you is agree?
> Based on this, the result would be:
> Example 2
> Returned with: 1
> (Thu Nov 22 12:42:37 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Terminating [nss][27350]
> (Thu Nov 22 12:42:37 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Couldn't kill
[nss][27350]: [No such process]
> (Thu Nov 22 12:42:37 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Terminating [ssh][27349]
> (Thu Nov 22 12:42:37 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Couldn't kill
[ssh][27349]: [No such process]
> (Thu Nov 22 12:42:37 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Terminating [pam][27348]
> (Thu Nov 22 12:42:37 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Couldn't kill
[pam][27348]: [No such process]
> (Thu Nov 22 12:42:37 2012) [sssd] [sbus_remove_watch] (0x2000): 0x237a080/0x237beb0
>
>
> otherwise (only ECHILD), the result would be how the first example.
>
I don't think having that extra line really matters, it's just a DEBUG
message (and only in the case when the configuration is wrong anyway).
What about the attached patch? It's the one you sent earlier with a
modification. Would you agree with that version? Would it fix the
problem for you?
Yes, this fix the problem :)
Thanks for comments and your time.
Thank you for reporting the bug and the contribution!
I'd like to see a second ack on the patch as it was kind of pair
programming, so I don't think I can ack on my own.
8:55 a.m.
On Wed 28 Nov 2012 09:35:10 AM EST, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 09:31:29AM -0500, Ariel Barria wrote:
>
>
>
> Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2012 15:10:17 +0100
> From: jhrozek(a)redhat.com
> To: sssd-devel(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
> Subject: Re: [SSSD] [PATCH] when monitor_quit is call and the process not exists
>
> On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 12:48:25PM -0500, Ariel Barria wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2012 15:42:59 +0100
>>> From: jhrozek(a)redhat.com
>>> To: sssd-devel(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
>>> Subject: Re: [SSSD] [PATCH] when monitor_quit is call and the process not
exists
>>>
>>> On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 03:15:43PM -0500, Ariel Barria wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi.
>>>> well, I'm not sure that this patch have the behavior that is it hope.
You have the word.
>>>> But when monitor_quit is call and the process not exists, this remains in
loop and not allow signal.
>>>> I try it with Monitor Task and nothing.
>>>> I had to reboot
>>>
>>> Thanks a lot, Ariel, this is quite a bad bug. The concept is good, but
>>> can you change the patch a little?
>>>
>>> instead of:
>>> if (error != EINTR) {
>>> kill()
>>> if (error == ESRCH || error == ECHILD) {
>>> killed = true;
>>> }
>>> }
>>
>>
>> OK.
>>
>>> I would use:
>>> if (error == ECHILD) {
>>> /* Skip this process */
>>> killed = true;
>>> } else if (error != EINTR) {
>>> /* Keep the block with the kill function around */
>>> }
>>>
>>
>>
>>> Also, are you sure about the ESRCH error code? The waitpid man page only
>>> mentions ECHILD..
>>
>>
>> well, really not is waipit.
>> For example 1
>> (Thu Nov 22 10:17:44 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0040): Returned with: 1
>> (Thu Nov 22 10:17:44 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Terminating
[pam][7494]
>> (Thu Nov 22 10:17:44 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Couldn't kill
[pam][7494]: [3] [No such process] *********
>> (Thu Nov 22 10:17:44 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0010): [10][No child
processes] while waiting for [pam] ****waitpid
>> (Thu Nov 22 10:17:44 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Terminating
[ssh][7493]
>> (Thu Nov 22 10:17:44 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Couldn't kill
[ssh][7493]: [3] [No such process]
>> (Thu Nov 22 10:17:44 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0010): [10][No child
processes] while waiting for [ssh]
>> (Thu Nov 22 10:17:44 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Terminating
[nss][7492]
>> (Thu Nov 22 10:17:44 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Couldn't kill
[nss][7492]: [3] [No such process]
>> (Thu Nov 22 10:17:44 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0010): [10][No child
processes] while waiting for [nss]
>> (Thu Nov 22 10:17:44 2012) [sssd] [sbus_remove_watch] (0x2000):
0x9ee5f0/0x9f1430
>>
>> I think that if the process not exists, is not necessary waitpit. you is agree?
>> Based on this, the result would be:
>> Example 2
>> Returned with: 1
>> (Thu Nov 22 12:42:37 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Terminating
[nss][27350]
>> (Thu Nov 22 12:42:37 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Couldn't kill
[nss][27350]: [No such process]
>> (Thu Nov 22 12:42:37 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Terminating
[ssh][27349]
>> (Thu Nov 22 12:42:37 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Couldn't kill
[ssh][27349]: [No such process]
>> (Thu Nov 22 12:42:37 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Terminating
[pam][27348]
>> (Thu Nov 22 12:42:37 2012) [sssd] [monitor_quit] (0x0020): Couldn't kill
[pam][27348]: [No such process]
>> (Thu Nov 22 12:42:37 2012) [sssd] [sbus_remove_watch] (0x2000):
0x237a080/0x237beb0
>>
>>
>> otherwise (only ECHILD), the result would be how the first example.
>>
>
> I don't think having that extra line really matters, it's just a DEBUG
> message (and only in the case when the configuration is wrong anyway).
>
> What about the attached patch? It's the one you sent earlier with a
> modification. Would you agree with that version? Would it fix the
> problem for you?
>
> Yes, this fix the problem :)
> Thanks for comments and your time.
Thank you for reporting the bug and the contribution!
I'd like to see a second ack on the patch as it was kind of pair
programming, so I don't think I can ack on my own.
Ack.
4165
days inactive
4172
days old
sssd-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org
7 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
Ariel Barria -
Jakub Hrozek -
Stephen Gallagher