On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 10:57:31PM +0400, Denis Bilenko
wrote:
> No, it's not that. Attached is the program that checks the error codes
> and also waits for a child using child watcher. Still fails.
Now you changed your program considerably, and I am too lazy/sleepy to
track down further bugs in
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 10:08 PM, Marc Lehmann wrote:
> You also don't call waitpid on your children - can you add error checking
> to all functions you call, to make sure you really do wait for your
> children (especially check fork returns)? Most likely you run out of
> process slots and fork fa
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 09:57:30PM +0400, Denis Bilenko
wrote:
> On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 7:12 PM, Marc Lehmann wrote:
> > This one - your test program forks after initialising the default loop,
> > without calling ev_default_fork.
>
> OK, I've fixed the test program to do that and also fixed a
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 7:12 PM, Marc Lehmann wrote:
> This one - your test program forks after initialising the default loop,
> without calling ev_default_fork.
OK, I've fixed the test program to do that and also fixed a fd leak.
It takes a bit longer to fail now, but it still fails.
> I added
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 05:29:20PM +0200, Gabriel Kerneis
wrote:
> I do not understand what you mean here, probably because I never tried to mix
> fork, pthreads and epoll in a single program. Could you please provide some
Oh, it's quite independent of each other, too, i.e. you don't have to us
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 05:29:20PM +0200, Gabriel Kerneis
wrote:
> I do not understand what you mean here, probably because I never tried to mix
> fork, pthreads and epoll in a single program. Could you please provide some
> more details,
epoll: epoll file descriptors are available in the child
Hi Marc,
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 05:12:22PM +0200, Marc Lehmann wrote:
> Now, the fork business is very unfortunate, but both epoll/kqueue and
> pthreads have diminished fork into a state where using an event loop in
> both parent ands child has become extreely hard (actually, doing anything
> in
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 04:31:05PM +0400, Denis Bilenko
wrote:
> I have a weird test case (attached) where SIGCHLD is not being
> received by libev. I don't quite understand if it's a
Well, thanks for a simple-to-try test program :)
> 1) bug in how I use libev
This one - your test program fork
Hi,
I have a weird test case (attached) where SIGCHLD is not being
received by libev. I don't quite understand if it's a
1) bug in how I use libev
2) bug in libev itself
3) bug in the OS
The work around I found that makes this test pass is to patch libev to
start a timer (active only when there
