X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org D124B3858439 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cygwin.com; s=default; t=1636500671; bh=iEXyQBZhEx2xBpcqbDnH4PniApzqGKFtftCd6EBPuTU=; 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=kl4VpDpVPSUC8+qDDrs0zJ8va4eQPW1LJxncSfjt2Gw9jkTS0+WyTumgyh3W+tlHU mcB5t0Ba+c2e9rfuD6eZsd/rV5Qov4KQXjmPxI48l6Yttr9vlb2eNM0dY39kUMlmei CewvmEzGJyH+Dke9MUYz+SP94Yn23oN++jL2sG8M= X-Original-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org F15CF3858404 DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.10.3 conssluserg-03.nifty.com 1A9NTPgQ006126 X-Nifty-SrcIP: [110.4.221.123] Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2021 08:29:32 +0900 To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: Another pipe-related problem? Message-Id: <20211110082932.3e33bae9364db0dda0c57d16@nifty.ne.jp> In-Reply-To: <20211110082245.2943cf3c2519bff24a6843b2@nifty.ne.jp> References: <05c4180e-396b-4af3-ac0c-2ab8125df17e AT cornell DOT edu> <20211110082245 DOT 2943cf3c2519bff24a6843b2 AT nifty DOT ne DOT jp> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.7.0 (GTK+ 2.24.30; i686-pc-mingw32) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, NICE_REPLY_A, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Cygwin discussions and problem reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: Takashi Yano via Cygwin Reply-To: Takashi Yano Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: cygwin-bounces+archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com Sender: "Cygwin" On Wed, 10 Nov 2021 08:22:45 +0900 Takashi Yano wrote: > On Tue, 9 Nov 2021 09:11:28 -0500 > Ken Brown wrote: > > I'll have to reproduce the hang myself in order to test this (or maybe you could > > test it), but I now have a new guess: If the read call above keeps failing with > > EINTR, then we're in an infinite loop. This could happen because of the > > following code in fhandler_pipe::raw_read: > > > > DWORD waitret = cygwait (read_mtx, timeout); > > switch (waitret) > > { > > case WAIT_OBJECT_0: > > break; > > case WAIT_TIMEOUT: > > set_errno (EAGAIN); > > len = (size_t) -1; > > return; > > default: > > set_errno (EINTR); > > len = (size_t) -1; > > return; > > } > > > > Takashi, is EINTR really the appropriate errno in the default case? Isn't > > cygwait supposed to handle signals? > > I assume cygwait() returns WAIT_SIGNALED when signalled > by SIGINT, SIGTERM, SIGTSTP, etc... In this case, EINTR > should return I think. > > Is it wrong? Ah, if SA_RESTART is set, we should continue to read even if signalled... -- Takashi Yano -- 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