X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: RE: random "fork: Resource temporarily unavailable" Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 07:24:15 -0700 Message-ID: <251D2B65F6DECE47A69C7C3AB504D72FB283A8@namail2.corp.adobe.com> in-reply-to: <449228DE.206@cygwin.com> From: "Mark Bartel" To: X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id k5KEOjkS014752 Larry Hall wrote: > Linda Walsh wrote: > > I've not seen this message except when I've had to rapidly > > press ^C to break out of a loop shell script. > > > > Today, I've seen it twice when there was virtually no cpu load > > on the system, about 50% virtual memory committed, and 40 processes. > > > > Once, was with an "ls" command, the other happened as my shell was > > starting up by some command invoked in the .rc script. > > > > I get suspicious whenever I see behavior on my computers when > > anomalies crop up. > > > > I don't think any of my cygwin libraries have been updated recently. > > > > What would cause something like this? Memory fragmentation? > > Insufficient real memory to "immediately" fork? I.e. I wonder > > if, when NT goes to "fork", if it doesn't have enough free > > memory, it tells the caller it failed (try again later) and > > then starts a memory cleanup cycle to free up memory: i.e. rather > > than the forking process sleeping while memory is made available > > NT returns it immediately with a failure. > > > > Any idea on causes? Is it as rare as it has been for me? > > A possible solution would be retry the fork a second time, or > > sleep for a millisecond and then try fork again. I'm not sure, > > but I think many *ixy (*='un'|'pos'|'lin'|'ir'...etc) type programs > > may not retry the fork but immediately die, as on *ixy systems, > > a fork failure is less common, and usually only happens when > > the system really is out of resources. If that's the case, > > it _might_ be an aid to smooth *ixy compatibility for the > > library handling fork, retry the fork (possibly with millisecond > > sleep) once before returning failure to the application. > > > > Not a high priority issue, but just wondering.... > > > > Linda > > If it is NT returning failure rather than > > forking, I wonder if, in order to provide a better "run-time" > > > If you can reproduce this problem, I would suggest trying it again with > a recent snapshot. This sounds like the same issue I was encountering. I can reproduce it on demand with: mbartel AT mbartel-t60p ~ $ find * -type f -exec grep foo {} /dev/null \; 6 [main] find 435884 fhandler_dev_zero::fixup_mmap_after_fork: requested 0x480000 != 0x0 mem alloc base 0x480000, state 0x2000, size 1040384, Win32 error 487 272 [main] find 435884 C:\cygwin\bin\find.exe: *** fatal error - C:\cygwin\bin\find.exe: *** recreate_mmaps_after_fork_failed 13 [main] find 434720 child_info::sync: wait failed, pid 435884, Win32 error 0 344 [main] find 434720 fork: child -1 - died waiting for longjmp before initialization, retry 10, exit code 0x1000000, errno 11 find: cannot fork: Resource temporarily unavailable mbartel AT mbartel-t60p ~ $ Unfortunately, it is more than just annoying in my case, as it happens all the time. I had to buy MKS Toolkit to get on with my job. -Mark -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/