DMARC-Filter:	OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 delorie.com 4AJ9MQeT3045980
Authentication-Results:	delorie.com; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=cygwin.com
Authentication-Results:	delorie.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cygwin.com
DKIM-Filter:	OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 delorie.com 4AJ9MQeT3045980
Authentication-Results:	delorie.com;
	dkim=pass (1024-bit key, unprotected) header.d=cygwin.com header.i=@cygwin.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=default header.b=dnM5JMh4
X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
DKIM-Filter:	OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 0C55B3858D21
DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cygwin.com;
	s=default; t=1732008146;
	bh=ChVEx2hgchHeLjeSyZcyWkZKYAKQ2VXxxyOer8ko6AI=;
	h=Date:To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe:
	List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To:
	From;
	b=dnM5JMh4uHnsWB01EOMJbr4VqAQLQjmnOq8wQyJVnuSWIW5ecNLLs8zjCIMprDgbH
	tNgqxJWWWBSOhwfTwb2h3pCAhcXK+D7/UFxDd88JNQOhgfvv3mNYipYHEDjeM4IEoa
	UV4fvlpq8nd9BvhUcW89c7yAyzJBDPC7mOT6VyaU=
X-Original-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
DMARC-Filter:	OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org A8A773858D21
ARC-Filter:	OpenARC Filter v1.0.0 sourceware.org A8A773858D21
ARC-Seal:	i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1732008115; cv=none;
	b=NzRgngFZC288h06962IXstt83IkTRGcitC7m8Hri9v1OqIGJ9rl4cnoWXsPXykfTEp/9n2inJ1Kl0ui/aGXnKkpFabvPHGEedZz0CPhsvocGt+/v3TTEnclV0qOhP3SfC2fbwsLIzRl4XDcTT7Q/aO5npNt1kl2H8g2pZzlxK+c=
ARC-Message-Signature:	i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key;
	t=1732008115; c=relaxed/simple;
	bh=aVwHPW1ZGxu/pQa45PIzLdCph4eLWOSTiUywVg6H96I=;
	h=Date:From:To:Subject:Message-Id:Mime-Version:DKIM-Signature;
	b=DL2loy+bAjegujL/14A12LF204A1bQUgx6vrjx7BnfBvtCbKVo3hq4vYII1f6Xu6yqKMEkMhXiQZ+A/p7mhnB7dF4ZMdSUKubRnuBbsDOkFv+vo4GQUYahPfetwdZBLv1pcMq6LfcQH9+Jb1XuA1jdLKQPFZMOEV7TxGIq5BMZs=
ARC-Authentication-Results:	i=1; server2.sourceware.org
DKIM-Filter:	OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org A8A773858D21
Date:	Tue, 19 Nov 2024 18:21:52 +0900
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: SIGKILL may no longer work after many SIGCONT/SIGSTOP signals
Message-Id:	<20241119182152.c2195f50ed7091fbed644606@nifty.ne.jp>
In-Reply-To:	<adc78776-84f6-82bc-13b4-3a51b11027fa@t-online.de>
References:	<adc78776-84f6-82bc-13b4-3a51b11027fa AT t-online DOT de>
X-Mailer:	Sylpheed 3.7.0 (GTK+ 2.24.30; i686-pc-mingw32)
Mime-Version:	1.0
X-BeenThere:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
X-Mailman-Version:	2.1.30
List-Id:	General Cygwin discussions and problem reports <cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Unsubscribe:	<https://cygwin.com/mailman/options/cygwin>,
	<mailto:cygwin-request AT cygwin DOT com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive:	<https://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-request AT cygwin DOT com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe:	<https://cygwin.com/mailman/listinfo/cygwin>,
	<mailto:cygwin-request AT cygwin DOT com?subject=subscribe>
From:	Takashi Yano via Cygwin <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Reply-To:	Takashi Yano <takashi DOT yano AT nifty DOT ne DOT jp>
Errors-To:	cygwin-bounces~archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com
Sender:	"Cygwin" <cygwin-bounces~archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com>

On Tue, 12 Nov 2024 10:53:58 +0100
Christian Franke wrote:
> Found with 'stress-ng --cpu-sched' from current stress-ng upstream HEAD:
> 
> Testcase (attached):
> 
> $ gcc -O2 -o manysignals manysignals.c
> 
> $ ./manysignals
> fork() = 1833
> ...
> fork() = 1848
> ...
> kill(1833, 17)
> ...
> kill(1848, 17)
> kill(1833, 9)
> ...
> kill(1848, 9)
> waitpid(1833, ., 0)
> 
> 
> Run this in second terminal:
> 
> $ watch "ps | sed -n '1p;/manysignals/{/sed/d;p}'"
> 
> If 'S' appear in the first column, the child processes likely reached 
> the final SIGSTOP state. This takes some time. The parent process may 
> still hang in first waitpid() but should not.
> 
> If the parent process is aborted with ^C, child processes may be stopped 
> or left behind. Occasionally a child process that can not be stopped by 
> Cygwin (kill -9) is left behind.
> 
> Tested with ancient (i7-2600K) and more recent (i7-14700K) CPU :-)
> 
> 
> Unrelated to the above, but related to 'stress-ng --cpu-sched' which 
> uses sched_get/setscheduler():
> 
> - sched_getscheduler() always returns SCHED_FIFO. As far as I understand 
> Linux sched(7), this is a non-preemptive real-time policy. The 
> preemptive SCHED_RR would possibly a more reasonable value. 
> Unfortunately SCHED_OTHER cannot be used because it would require to 
> ignore the priority.
> 
> - sched_setscheduler() always fails with ENOSYS. It IMO should allow to 
> set 'param->sched_priority' if 'policy' is equal to the value returned 
> by sched_getscheduler().

Thanks for the report and the test case. I'm now looking into
the issue. Please wait a while.

-- 
Takashi Yano <takashi DOT yano AT nifty DOT ne DOT jp>

-- 
Problem reports:      https://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                  https://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:        https://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:     https://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

- Raw text -