[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180205162715.GW1627@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2018 11:27:15 -0500
From: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] re-fix child reaping in wordexp
On Mon, Feb 05, 2018 at 05:38:37PM +0300, Alexander Monakov wrote:
> Do not retry waitpid if the child was terminated by a signal. Do not
> examine status: since we are not passing any flags, we will not receive
> stop or continue notifications.
Looks fine.
> ---
>
> In general retrying waitpid on EINTR is not robust in case pid reuse is
> possible, but fixing that requires changing waitpid call sites to only
> do that with signals blocked (where that's not already the case).
I don't follow this. Unless there's a bug in the kernel, this should
not be functionally different from SA_RESTART. A return with EINTR
means the child was not reaped.
Rich
>
> src/misc/wordexp.c | 8 +-------
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/src/misc/wordexp.c b/src/misc/wordexp.c
> index db39b5b8..d123cf75 100644
> --- a/src/misc/wordexp.c
> +++ b/src/misc/wordexp.c
> @@ -14,13 +14,7 @@
> static void reap(pid_t pid)
> {
> int status;
> - for (;;) {
> - if (waitpid(pid, &status, 0) < 0) {
> - if (errno != EINTR) return;
> - } else {
> - if (WIFEXITED(status)) return;
> - }
> - }
> + while (waitpid(pid, &status, 0) < 0 && errno == EINTR);
> }
>
> static char *getword(FILE *f)
> --
> 2.11.0
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
