DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:date:from:to:subject:message-id:reply-to
	:references:mime-version:content-type:in-reply-to; q=dns; s=
	default; b=QIgUBPwcBEabfuHfZMp0Kuac3iFLjceoRiQeO4zSbPWCgzKfhhUHo
	aqvsII48xs5csKVtFHtKiQJs9Wdz0sWyGyXvRrdVA+UzCsSMNGZ+kwZyHVi9/vth
	5G+itqTxFtstAU653IM69RsG6JR3KcY5HGNlpVy1CUrGGGCG9+VCA8=
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 20:29:19 +0100
From: Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin@cygwin.com>
To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Subject: Re: bash.exe: *** fatal error - add_item ("\??\C:\cygwin", "/", ...) failed, errno 1
Message-ID: <20150309192919.GB30402@calimero.vinschen.de>
Reply-To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com
References: <33B440E9970A984C93230FC4FA9B70ECCF1964@DALIFXMB1.hbk.com> <33B440E9970A984C93230FC4FA9B70ECCF19A0@DALIFXMB1.hbk.com> <20150305170349.GI3213@calimero.vinschen.de> <33B440E9970A984C93230FC4FA9B70ECCF225E@DALIFXMB1.hbk.com> <20150309091806.GC28200@calimero.vinschen.de> <33B440E9970A984C93230FC4FA9B70ECCF42AE@DALIFXMB1.hbk.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="pvezYHf7grwyp3Bc"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <33B440E9970A984C93230FC4FA9B70ECCF42AE@DALIFXMB1.hbk.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)

--pvezYHf7grwyp3Bc
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Mar  9 16:12, Vladimir Sakharuk wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com [mailto:cygwin-owner@cygwin.com] On=20
> > Behalf Of Corinna Vinschen
> > Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2015 12:04 PM
> > To: cygwin@cygwin.com
> > Subject: Re: bash.exe: *** fatal error - add_item ("\??\C:\cygwin",=20
> > "/", ...) failed, errno 1
> >=20
> > On Mar  5 15:40, Vladimir Sakharuk wrote:
> > > Hi All,
> > > I have found similar issues, but did not find solution that worked
> > > for me. Looking for help.
> > >=20
> > > I am trying to run applications on windows cluster.
> > > I am getting random crashes like bellow.
> > > However most of the times it works. I assume around 1% of starts
> > > fails. Starting it is again usually succeed.
> > > I suspected that it was forking issue, but cygwin's rebase did not he=
lp.
> > > I did rebase after server reboot with no Cygwin apps running. (BTW,=
=20
> > > Is there any way to check if rebase successful?)
> >=20
> > That's not a rebase problem.  It's apparently a concurrency problem
> > of sorts.  While pulling up the per-user shared memory region, two
> > or more processes are trying to set up the same mount points.
> >=20
> > This is not supposed to happen.  Only the first process actually
> > *creating* the per-user shared memory is supposed to create the
> > mount points.  The OS tells a process if it created or just opened a
> > shared memory region, but for some reason both processes seem to
> > think they created the shmem region and one of them then stumbles of
> > the EPERM condition trying to create the root mount point twice.
> >=20
> > > Thank you for suggestions.
> >=20
> > I don't have a sugggestion, in fact.  Again, this error condition was s=
upposed to be impossible, but somehow it isn't in your cluster setup.
>=20
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com [mailto:cygwin-owner@cygwin.com] On Behalf =
Of Corinna Vinschen
> Sent: Monday, March 09, 2015 5:18 AM
> To: cygwin@cygwin.com
> Subject: Re: bash.exe: *** fatal error - add_item ("\??\C:\cygwin", "/", =
...) failed, errno 1
>=20
> On Mar  5 21:30, Vladimir Sakharuk wrote:
> > That was helpful! I have stopped trying rebase combinations and=20
> > looking for something else...
>=20
> It wasn't all that helpful I think.  My description of what happens
> was rather off.  Actually the fact if a process has created or just
> opened the shared mem region isn't checked at this point in time.
> Rather, a spinlock is used to generate exclusive access to the shared
> mem region at initilization time.
> This spinlock implementation, basically using the InterlockedExchange
> call at its code, has served us well in the past, but something in
> your cluster setup appears to break it, though I can't imagine how.
> One difference is that we are running(starting) up to 32 simultaneous
> instances of bash.exe/Cygwin on 32 core box.

Shouldn't make a difference since that's what the Interlocked operations
are meant for.


Corinna

--=20
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Maintainer                 cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat

--pvezYHf7grwyp3Bc
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2

iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJU/fSPAAoJEPU2Bp2uRE+gTLYQAKQllvKn5heP3G/gsTLLCU2l
m0QzGLAZTZf6toZCKqlykTa0yuw8q5ZQSLuqj3Oz0ZEFCgzvwpLIYj7rdjPqAcKF
VJrTmt5MTwzD44ryasKmduH4qQzx8ZYuY7KTgMQyCxruuzJcKLtQ7BrIfT2oTv4e
l7tnbjizNgc2EKJMKj2UxFIdl9jgGx5bUbRly3kPjf/MqiW+3VEt54+xsELa4ILI
JRGr6qcqDE9k/IGjY4tgcD5BC2zJTyLtEO8FcXtvxAN7F22rn2WWi6ffTrzOx/rA
djwar6xXgfMxtEeD50TrbvxuVgPf3eAnTEELsj99hsDb3TZ5duhHBfFokQiaiSe+
NrraLlQdjjSFR4DB1DmmNmzSkSSmAMQRJOC26X8cxJ8AinF5AEERZIuRYntCn+5s
ycmrp2NznfYBKR5N0ALcses9m9MjFU4vaoGcxvcyGdH1ewUlXOSSL+5ZCzHsxK4Q
+EmHKXQsPDPC4Ra4kKZ0gcLQ5SDtK+NNGzorSG/+/oSjThtF1kAxwiozjKmzKWau
JTGdf8MWxJsWsln3Cvsn3D/dYVFsviF9GiWUhLX8AX4Biqr57LsP+3VOI8ui27UK
yN5oR3mr9PUwm9qQuWoVqV6+VW+sBgGI/BFGFbI1MPWUvP62BKvYJDlQa0Da8vfS
Hy6yiMc3UEE4Yiwpl5xh
=yFt6
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--pvezYHf7grwyp3Bc--