DMARC-Filter:	OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 delorie.com 56I7q93S2361865
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 56I7q93S2361865
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=Oi2gw4qv
X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
DKIM-Filter:	OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org D57E8385DDF1
DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cygwin.com;
	s=default; t=1752825127;
	bh=MBUNlUa7W6C8Q5jgSjLR9uqFGjnGlisRh873y0nF6Sw=;
	h=Date:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe:
	List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To:Cc:
	From;
	b=Oi2gw4qv+AgnNmQ+0cvLn99wjntfBMXNMR9qM+aLHMw6LdoED+c3MVwmCxsJkeDn5
	zyrZkj8uaORxtevS2Ro2ZdCRYp1v7gsf6jHflKwIh+u37QTi0bAPiS2ufFG7WSqgV+
	yuAmE5Y56R1AGTTQUmEDcOXEzw2L6sK0zYrb8mGI=
X-Original-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
DKIM-Filter:	OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org C90EC3858C60
Date:	Fri, 18 Jul 2025 09:51:11 +0200
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: Calling system() in multi-threads.
Message-ID:	<aHn871v7YwBUOQfs@calimero.vinschen.de>
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References:	<20250617215411 DOT ebf69d1c18b55191a1b76c01 AT nifty DOT ne DOT jp>
	<eb7786ee-dc7a-4689-9d17-b842e581d7c7 AT maxrnd DOT com>
	<20250618203127 DOT 71ac180de11230a9a6055185 AT nifty DOT ne DOT jp>
	<20250716235236 DOT 96055ec145d9a0528b50c357 AT nifty DOT ne DOT jp>
	<aHfHCqD2xZcdyu7u AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de>
	<20250717231421 DOT 56b54f7e96266311101d4c08 AT nifty DOT ne DOT jp>
	<aHkUldQHKjA-lZrw AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de>
	<20250718004446 DOT 9ce9f7f208566ded1a676fd5 AT nifty DOT ne DOT jp>
MIME-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<20250718004446.9ce9f7f208566ded1a676fd5@nifty.ne.jp>
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:	Corinna Vinschen via Cygwin <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Reply-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Cc:	Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
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>
X-MIME-Autoconverted:	from base64 to 8bit by delorie.com id 56I7q93S2361865

On Jul 18 00:44, Takashi Yano via Cygwin wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Jul 2025 17:19:49 +0200
> Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > On Jul 17 23:14, Takashi Yano via Cygwin wrote:
> > > Hi Corinna,
> > > 
> > > On Wed, 16 Jul 2025 17:36:42 +0200
> > > Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > > > On Jul 16 23:52, Takashi Yano via Cygwin wrote:
> > > > > Do you have any idea?
> > > > 
> > > > Locking would be super-simple.
> > > > 
> > > > But theoretically it should be possible to use a local child_info_spawn
> > > > variable at this point.  The ch_spawn child_info_spawn instance is not
> > > > copied to the child anyway, so that should be safe.  The same goes for
> > > > posix_spawn() then, btw.
> > > > 
> > > > I checked the sources and I don't see any dependency to ch_spawn
> > > > from a spawning process, in contrast to an exec'ing process.  That
> > > > doesn't mean there is none, just that I didn't find any.
> > > 
> > > Thanks!
> > > As a starting point, I tried tntroducing locking. It almost works
> > > as expected, however, sometimes my STC in my first report is hangs
> > > if N is large e.g. 100. The patch is as attached.
> > > 
> > > What am I missing?
> > 
> > I don't know.  You're perhaps not releasing the lock in all cases.
> > But I would have to debug this just like you ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
> > 
> > Out of curiosity, did you try using a locale child_info_spawn instance
> > instead?  That would be a rather nice solution, but I'm pretty sure
> > there's some other problem lurking in the dark...
> 
> I'm not sure what to do with local child_info_spawn.
> Some of other modules refer to ch_spawn, such as exception.cc and
> pinfo.cc. Also, has_execed* uses ch_spawn. What should we do for that?

Yes, that's what I meant with my above paragraph, i.e.

> > > > I checked the sources and I don't see any dependency to ch_spawn
> > > > from a spawning process, in contrast to an exec'ing process.  That
> > > > doesn't mean there is none, just that I didn't find any.

These external dependencies *should* only be of interest when performing
an execve, but not when performing a spawnve.


Corinna

-- 
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 -