Re: [PATCH 1/4] run-command: add new check_command helper
From: Jeff King <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:56:36
On Mon, Apr 01, 2013 at 11:22:36PM -0600, Felipe Contreras wrote:
On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 11:14 PM, Jeff King [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
On Mon, Apr 01, 2013 at 11:11:20PM -0600, Felipe Contreras wrote:quoted
quoted
But if we know from reading waitpid(3) that waitpid should only fail due to EINTR, or due to bogus arguments (e.g., a pid that does not exist or has already been reaped), then maybe something like this makes sense: while ((waiting = waitpid(pid, &status, 0)) < 0 && errno == EINTR) ; /* nothing */But we don't want to wait synchronously here, we just want to ping.Yeah, sorry, I forgot the WNOHANG there.It still can potentially stay in a loop for some cycles.
That should be OK; it's the same loop we use in wait_or_whine (and that is in fact how I managed to get the WNOHANG wrong, as I copied the loop from there but forgot to update the flag variable). A few cycles is OK, as it is really about handling a simultaneous signal; it should be rare that we loop at all, and even rarer to loop more than a single time. On Linux, I don't think we will ever get EINTR at all, according to the manpage; however, POSIX seems to allow EINTR even with WNOHANG. -Peff