Mail Archives: cygwin/2010/08/09/14:03:16
On Mon, Aug 09, 2010 at 07:01PM +0200, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 09, 2010 at 03:00:03AM +0200, Bert Belder wrote:
> >I think the pipe(2) implementation may have a bug.
> >
> >The pipe function creates a pipe and returns two file descriptors
> >(which are just numbers), one for reading and one for writing.
> However
> >sometimes (but rarely) two subsequent calls to the pipe function
> >returns the same file descriptor twice. That is normal when a file
> >descriptor 'number' is re-used after being closed first, but
otherwise
> >it is wrong. To demonstrate the problem I wrote a simple program
> >(attached as test.c) that does the following:
> >
> >1. Create three pipes, so we get 6 file descriptors
> >2. (dump the FD's we got)
> >3. Close 3 of the 6 file descriptors
> >4. (Dump the FD's that were closed)
> >5. Repeat steps 1-4 a 100 times
> >
> >The first three rounds give sound results:
> >? ??0 opened: pipe1=3D(3, 4), pipe2=3D(5, 6), pipe3=3D(7, 8)
> >? ??0 closed: pipe1[0]=3D3, pipe2[1]=3D6, pipe3[1]=3D8
> >? ??1 opened: pipe1=3D(3, 6), pipe2=3D(8, 9), pipe3=3D(10, 11)
> >? ??1 closed: pipe1[0]=3D3, pipe2[1]=3D9, pipe3[1]=3D11
> >? ??2 opened: pipe1=3D(3, 9), pipe2=3D(11, 12), pipe3=3D(13, 14)
> >? ??2 closed: pipe1[0]=3D3, pipe2[1]=3D12, pipe3[1]=3D14
> >??? ...
> >As can be seen the FD's that were closed are re-used next round.
> Perfectly fine.
> >
> >But then suddenly at round 94...
> >??? 93 opened: pipe1=3D(3, 282), pipe2=3D(284, 285), pipe3=3D(286, 287)
> >??? 93 closed: pipe1[0]=3D3, pipe2[1]=3D285, pipe3[1]=3D287
> >??? 94 opened: pipe1=3D(3, 285), pipe2=3D(287, 288), pipe3=3D(287, 289) =
?<-
> !!!!!!!!!!!!
> >File descriptor 287 is issued twice!
> >
> >I think this is a bug. It actually causes problems under certain
> >circumstances when running a Cygwin build of nodejs
> >(http://nodejs.org). Or am I just doing something stupid?
>=20
> Nope. It was a very long-standing Cygwin bug. The error occurred
when
> Cygwin extended the size of its fd table. When that happened the the
> internal information for the fd of the [0] element to the pipe() call
> would never be filled out. If you attempted to use it you'd probably
> get an EBADF. And, since cygwin thought it wasn't used it would
> present
> it to your program again. It's hard to believe that this hasn't shown
> up before.
>=20
> This should be fixed in the next snapshot, which is building now.
An EBADF error followed by a crash was actually the problem I originally
ran into.
Using the latest snapshot DLL indeed solves my problem, thanks for
fixing it.
- Bert
--
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
- Raw text -