perl, no child process w/ "open" - perl

Hi I have this problem where the perl script spits back "No child process found at" ...
My script calls several different types of forks, so I tried implementing the perldoc's waitpid() implementation method to be able to use handle both fork & exec & system & qw.
$SIG{CHLD} = sub {
# don't change $! and $? outside handler
local ($!, $?);
my $pid = waitpid(-1, WNOHANG) > 0;
return if $pid == -1;
return unless defined $children{$pid};
delete $children{$pid};
};
my $pid = fork();
die "cannot fork" unless defined $pid;
if ($pid == 0) {
# ...
exit 0;
} else {
$children{$pid}=1;
# ...
exec($command);
}
There is no problem with this part of the execution of the code, however the "No child processor found" occurs when I try to close the filehandle's CLOSE. Can someone explain to me how come this is happening, as I really want to understand this problem more in depth. Do I end up reaping the child process forked by the OPEN call, so that the close doesn't know how to handle the file handle? or maybe I'm 100% off. Any solutions would be appreciated
open(RESULTS, "-|", "find $dir\/ -maxdepth 1 -name RESULTS -print0 | xargs -0 cat ") or die $!;
while(<RESULTS>){
if($_ =~ /match/){
print $_;
}
}
close RESULTS;

close on a handle* opened thusly calls waitpid to reap the child created by open. However, your signal handler managed to reap the child before close did, so close could not find the child, so close returned an error.
You could fix this by changing your signal handler to only reap the children you've created using fork (below), or you could ignore that error from close.
$SIG{CHLD} = sub {
local ($!, $?, $^E);
for my $pid (keys(%children)) {
if (waitpid($pid, WNOHANG) > 0) {
delete $children{$pid};
}
}
};
* — The proper term is "file handle". It is named such since it allows you to hold onto a file. It's not handler as it performs no action.

Related

Understanding how Perl fork works

What would be the right way to fork processes that each one of them runs a different subroutine sub1,sub2,...,subN. After reading a lot of previous thread and material, I feel that I understand the logic but a bit confused on how to write in the cleanest way possible (readability is important to me).
Consider 4 subs. Each one of them gets different arguments. It feels like that the most efficient way would be to create 7 forks that each one of them will run a different sub. The code will look something like this:
my $forks = 0;
foreach my $i (1..4) {
if ($i == 1) {
my $pid = fork();
if ($pid == 0) {
$forks++;
run1();
exit;
}
} elsif ($i == 2) {
my $pid = fork();
if ($pid == 0) {
$forks++;
run1();
exit;
}
} elsif ($i == 3) {
my $pid = fork();
if ($pid == 0) {
$forks++;
run1();
exit;
}
} elsif ($i == 4) {
my $pid = fork();
if ($pid == 0) {
$forks++;
run1();
exit;
}
}
}
for (1 .. $forks) {
my $pid = wait();
print "Parent saw $pid exiting\n";
}
print "done\n";
Some points:
This will work only if all of the forks were successful. But I would like to run the subs even though the fork failed (even though it will not be parallel. In that case, I guess we need to take the subs out of the if and exit only if the $pid wasn't 0. something like:
my $pid = fork();
run1();
$forks++ if ($pid == 0);
exit if ($pid == 0);
But it still feels not right.
Using exit is the right way to kill the child process? if the processes were killed with exit should I still use wait? Will it prevent zombies?
Maybe the most interesting question: What will I do if we have 15 function calls? I would like to somehow create 15 forks but I can't create 15 if-else statements - the code will not be readable that way. At first, I thought that it is possible to insert those function calls into an array (somehow) and loop over that array. But after some research, I didn't find a way that it is possible.
If possible, I prefer not to use any additional modules like Parallel::ForkManager.
Is there a clean and simple way to solve it?
There are a few questions to clear up here.
A basic example
use warnings;
use strict;
use feature 'say';
my #coderefs;
for my $i (1..4) {
push #coderefs, sub {
my #args = #_;
say "Sub #$i with args: #args";
};
}
my #procs;
for my $i (0 .. $#coderefs) {
my $pid = fork // do {
warn "Can't fork: $!";
# retry, or record which subs failed so to run later
next;
};
if ($pid == 0) {
$coderefs[$i]->("In $$: $i");
exit;
}
push #procs, $pid;
#sleep 1;
}
say "Started: #procs";
for my $pid (#procs) {
my $goner = waitpid $pid, 0;
say "$goner exited with $?";
}
We generate anonymous subroutines and store those code references in an array, then go through that array and start that many processes, running a sub in each. After that the parent waitpids on these in the order in which they were started, but normally you'll want to reap as they exit; see docs listed below.
A child process always exits, or you'd have multiple processes executing all of the rest of the code in the program. Once a child process exits the kernel will notify the parent, and the parent can "pick up" that notification ("reap" the exit status of the child process) via wait/waitpid, or use a signal handler to handle/ignore it.
If the parent never does this after the child exited, once it exits itself later the OS stays stuck with that information about the (exited) child process in the process table; that's a zombie. So you do need to wait, so that OS gets done with the child process (and you check up on how it went). Or, you can indicate in a signal handler that you don't care about the child's exit.† Modern systems reap would-be zombies but not always and you cannot rely on that; clean up after yourself.
Note, you'll need to be reading perlipc, fork, wait and waitpid, perlvar ... and yet other resources that'll come up while working on all this. It will take a little playing and some trial and error. Once you get it all down you may want to start using modules, at least for some types of tasks.
† To ignore the SIGCHLD (default)
$SIG{CHLD} = 'IGNORE';
Or, can run code there (but well advised to be minimal)
$SIG{CHLD} = sub { ... };
These signal "dispositions" are inherited in fork-ed processes (but not via execve).
See the docs listed above, and the basics of %SIG variable in perlvar. Also see man(7) signal. All this is generally *nix business.
This is a global variable, affecting all code in the interpreter. In order to limit the change to the nearest scope use local
local $SIG{CHLD} = ...

IPC communication between 2 processes with Perl

Let's say we have a 'Child' and 'Parent' process defined and subroutines
my $pid = fork;
die "fork failed: $!" unless defined($pid);
local $SIG{USR1} = sub {
kill KILL => $pid;
$SIG{USR1} = 'IGNORE';
kill USR1 => $$;
};
and we divide them, is it possible to do the following?
if($pid == 0){
sub1();
#switch to Parent process to execute sub4()
sub2();
#switch to Parent process to execute sub5()
sub3();
}
else
{
sub4();
#send message to child process so it executes sub2
sub5();
#send message to child process so it executes sub3
}
If yes, can you point how, or where can I look for the solution? Maybe a short example would suffice. :)
Thank you.
There is a whole page in the docs about inter process communication: perlipc
To answer your question - yes, there is a way to do what you want. The problem is, exactly what it is ... depends on your use case. I can't tell what you're trying to accomplish - what you you mean by 'switch to parent' for example?
But generally the simplest (in my opinion) is using pipes:
#!/usr/bin/env perl
use strict;
use warnings;
pipe ( my $reader, my $writer );
my $pid = fork(); #you should probably test for undef for fork failure.
if ( $pid == 0 ) {
## in child:
close ( $writer );
while ( my $line = <$reader> ) {
print "Child got $line\n";
}
}
else {
##in parent:
close ( $reader );
print {$writer} "Parent says hello!\n";
sleep 5;
}
Note: you may want to check your fork return codes - 0 means we're in the child - a number means we're in the parent, and undef means the fork failed.
Also: Your pipe will buffer - this might trip you over in some cases. It'll run to the end just fine, but you may not get IO when you think you should.
You can open pipes the other way around - for child->parent comms. Be slightly cautious when you multi-fork though, because an active pipe is inherited by every child of the fork - but it's not a broadcast.

close multiple output pipes in perl without blocking on each one

I have a perl script which sends a lot of output to multiple subprocesses. I need to be able to close my end of all the pipes and then wait for the subprocesses to finish their work. So far I've only succeeded at closing each pipe and waiting for each subprocess to finish one by one.
More concretely, I'm doing something like this:
for ($i=0;$i<24;$i++) {
my $fh;
open $fh, "|externalprogram $i";
$fhs{$i}=$fh;
}
#...now I can write output to the pipes
while (moreworktodo()) {
$whichone, $data = do_some_work();
print $fhs{$whichone} $data;
}
#Now I just need to wait for all the subprocesses to finish. However, they
#need to do a lot of work that can only begin when they've finished reading input. So I need to close my end of the pipe to indicate I'm finished.
for ($i=0;$i<24;$i++) {
my $file = $fhs{$i};
close $file; #unfortunately, this blocks until process $i finishes
#meanwhile all the other processes are waiting for EOF
#on their STDIN before they can proceed. So I end up waiting
#for 24 processes to finish one-at-a-time instead of all at once
}
One way to get all the subprocesses to finish promptly (closing their stdin) is simply to let my script exit without closing the (pipe) filehandles at all, but that's no good because the script is part of a larger job that needs the subprocess' work to actually be done before proceeding.
What is a simple way to close each subprocesses' stdin (so that they can all finish working) and then wait for all of them to finish before proceeding? I've tried forking off a child to close each pipe but that doesn't seem to work -- only the parent's "close" actually closes the stdin of the subprocess and waits for the subprocess to finish.
I would create the pipes myself and not use open(P, "|external-program").
Then you can close the pipe and not wait for the child process to exit.
Example of opening a pipe to a child process yourself:
sub spawn {
my ($cmd) = #_;
pipe(my $rp, $wp) or die "pipe failed: $!";
my $pid = fork();
die "fork: $!" unless defined($pid);
if ($pid) {
# parent
close($rp);
return ($wp, $pid);
} else {
# child
close($wp);
open(STDIN, "<&", $rp);
exec($cmd) or die "exec: $!";
}
}
sub main {
$| = 1;
my ($wp, $pid) = spawn("./child");
for (1..10) {
print {$wp} "sending $_\n";
}
close($wp);
print "done\n";
}
main();
Here's a sample child program to test that close() is NOT waiting for the child to exit:
# file: ./child
while (<STDIN>) {
print "got: $_";
sleep(2);
}
The last piece of the puzzle is to asynchronously wait for the child processes to exit.
This can be done with a $SIG{CHLD} handler, or, alternatively, here is a simplistic "join_children" function:
my #child_ids = (1..24); # or whatever ids you want to use
my %pipe; # hash map from child_id -> pipe handle
sub join_children {
for my $id (#child_ids) {
close( $pipe{$id} );
}
my $count = scalar(#child_ids);
while ($count > 0) {
wait;
$count--;
}
}

Problems while making a multiprocessing task in Perl

I'm trying to make a basic multiprocessing task and this is what I have. First of all, I don't know the right way to make this program as a non-blocking process, because when I am waiting for the response of a child (with waitpid) the other processes also have to wait in the queue, but, what will happen if some child processes die before (I mean, the processes die in disorder)? So, I've been searching and I foud that I can get the PID of the process that just die, for that I use waitpid(-1, WNOHANG). I always get a warning that WNOHANG is not a number, but when I added the lib sys_wait_h, I didn't get that error but the script never waits for PID, what may be the error?
#!/usr/bin/perl
#use POSIX ":sys_wait_h"; #if I use this library, I dont get the error, but it wont wait for the return of the child
use warnings;
main(#ARGV);
sub main{
my $num = 3;
for(1..$num){
my $pid = fork();
if ($pid) {
print "Im going to wait (Im the parent); my child is: $pid\n";
push(#childs, $pid);
}
elsif ($pid == 0) {
my $slp = 5 * $_;
print "$_ : Im going to execute my code (Im a child) and Im going to wait like $slp seconds\n";
sleep $slp;
print "$_ : I finished my sleep\n";
exit(0);
}
else {
die "couldn’t fork: $!\n";
}
}
foreach (#childs) {
print "Im waiting for: $_\n";
my $ret = waitpid(-1, WNOHANG);
#waitpid($_, 0);
print "Ive just finish waiting for: $_; the return: $ret \n";
}
}
Thanks in advance, bye!
If you use WNOHANG, the process will not block if no children have terminated. That's the point of WNOHANG; it ensures that waitpid() will return quickly. In your case, it looks like you want to just use wait() instead of waitpid().
I find that POE handles all of this stuff for me quite nicely. It's asynchronous (non-blocking) control of all sorts of things, including external processes. You don't have to deal with all the low level stuff because POE does it for you.

Killing child and its children when child was created using open

Here's my code, with error handling and other stuff removed for clarity:
sub launch_and_monitor {
my ($script, $timeout) = #_;
sub REAPER {
while ((my $child = waitpid(-1, &WNOHANG)) > 0) {}
$SIG{CHLD} = \&REAPER;
}
$SIG{CHLD} = \&REAPER;
my $pid = fork;
if (defined $pid) {
if ($pid == 0) {
# in child
monitor($timeout);
}
else {
launch($script);
}
}
}
The launch sub executes a shell script which in turn launches other processes, like so:
sub launch($) {
my ($script) = #_;
my $pid = open(PIPE, "$script|");
# write pid to pidfile
if ($pid != 0) {
while(<PIPE>) {
# do stuff with output
}
close(PIPE) or die $!;
}
}
The monitor sub basically just waits for a specified period of time and then attempts to kill the shell script.
sub monitor($) {
my ($timeout) = #_;
sleep $timeout;
# check if script is still running and if so get pid from pidfile
if (...) {
my $pid = getpid(...);
kill 9, $pid;
}
}
This kills the script, however, it does not kill any of its subprocesses. How to fix it?
You can do this with process groups, if your operating system supports them. You need to make the script process become a process group leader. The child processes that it runs will inherit the process group from their parent. You can then use kill to send a signal to each process in the group at the same time.
In launch(), you will need to replace the open line with one that forks. Then in the child, you would call setpgrp() before exec'ing the command. Something like the following should work:
my $pid = open(PIPE, "-|");
if (0 == $pid) {
setpgrp(0, 0);
exec $script;
die "exec failed: $!\n";
}
else {
while(<PIPE>) {
# do stuff with output
}
close(PIPE) or die $!;
}
Later, to kill the script process and its children, negate the process ID that you're signalling:
kill 9, -$pid;
In general, I don't think you can expect signals to be propagated into all child processes; this isn't specific to perl.
That said, you might be able to use the process group signal feature built into perl kill():
...if SIGNAL is negative, it kills process groups instead of processes...
You probably need to use setpgrp() on your (direct) child process, then change your kill call to something like:
kill -9, $pgrp;
Try adding:
use POSIX qw(setsid);
setsid;
at the top of your launch_and_monitor function. This will put your processes in a separate session, and cause things to exit when the session leader (i.e. the master) exits.
Killing a processgroup works, but don't forget the parent can be killed alone too. Assuming child processes have an event loop, they can check the parent socket that was created in a socketpair prior doing the fork() for validness. In fact, select() cleanly exits when the parent socket is gone, all that needs to be done is to check the socket.
E.g.:
use strict; use warnings;
use Socket;
$SIG{CHLD} = sub {};
socketpair(my $p, my $c, AF_UNIX, SOCK_STREAM, PF_UNSPEC) or die $!;
print "parent $$, fork 2 kids\n";
for (0..1){
my $kid = fork();
unless($kid){
child_loop($p, $c);
exit;
}
print "parent $$, forked kid $kid\n";
}
print "parent $$, waiting 5s\n";
sleep 5;
print "parent $$ exit, closing sockets\n";
sub child_loop {
my ($p_s, $c_s) = #_;
print "kid: $$\n";
close($c_s);
my $rin = '';
vec($rin, fileno($p_s), 1) = 1;
while(1){
select my $rout = $rin, undef, undef, undef;
if(vec($rout, fileno($p_s), 1)){
print "kid: $$, parent gone, exiting\n";
last;
}
}
}
Runs like this:
tim#mint:~$ perl ~/abc.pl
parent 5638, fork 2 kids
parent 5638, forked kid 5639
kid: 5639
parent 5638, forked kid 5640
parent 5638, waiting 5s
kid: 5640
parent 5638 exit, closing sockets
kid: 5640, parent gone, exiting
kid: 5639, parent gone, exiting
tim#mint:~$