Why do we need to call close on pipes before execvp? - c

Question

I've been trying to implement shell-like functionality with pipes in an application and I'm following this example. I will reproduce the code here for future reference in case the original is removed:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <unistd.h>
#include <fcntl.h>
#include <sys/types.h>
#include <sys/stat.h>
/**
* Executes the command "cat scores | grep Villanova | cut -b 1-10".
* This quick-and-dirty version does no error checking.
*
* #author Jim Glenn
* #version 0.1 10/4/2004
*/
int main(int argc, char **argv)
{
int status;
int i;
// arguments for commands; your parser would be responsible for
// setting up arrays like these
char *cat_args[] = {"cat", "scores", NULL};
char *grep_args[] = {"grep", "Villanova", NULL};
char *cut_args[] = {"cut", "-b", "1-10", NULL};
// make 2 pipes (cat to grep and grep to cut); each has 2 fds
int pipes[4];
pipe(pipes); // sets up 1st pipe
pipe(pipes + 2); // sets up 2nd pipe
// we now have 4 fds:
// pipes[0] = read end of cat->grep pipe (read by grep)
// pipes[1] = write end of cat->grep pipe (written by cat)
// pipes[2] = read end of grep->cut pipe (read by cut)
// pipes[3] = write end of grep->cut pipe (written by grep)
// Note that the code in each if is basically identical, so you
// could set up a loop to handle it. The differences are in the
// indicies into pipes used for the dup2 system call
// and that the 1st and last only deal with the end of one pipe.
// fork the first child (to execute cat)
if (fork() == 0)
{
// replace cat's stdout with write part of 1st pipe
dup2(pipes[1], 1);
// close all pipes (very important!); end we're using was safely copied
close(pipes[0]);
close(pipes[1]);
close(pipes[2]);
close(pipes[3]);
execvp(*cat_args, cat_args);
}
else
{
// fork second child (to execute grep)
if (fork() == 0)
{
// replace grep's stdin with read end of 1st pipe
dup2(pipes[0], 0);
// replace grep's stdout with write end of 2nd pipe
dup2(pipes[3], 1);
// close all ends of pipes
close(pipes[0]);
close(pipes[1]);
close(pipes[2]);
close(pipes[3]);
execvp(*grep_args, grep_args);
}
else
{
// fork third child (to execute cut)
if (fork() == 0)
{
// replace cut's stdin with input read of 2nd pipe
dup2(pipes[2], 0);
// close all ends of pipes
close(pipes[0]);
close(pipes[1]);
close(pipes[2]);
close(pipes[3]);
execvp(*cut_args, cut_args);
}
}
}
// only the parent gets here and waits for 3 children to finish
close(pipes[0]);
close(pipes[1]);
close(pipes[2]);
close(pipes[3]);
for (i = 0; i < 3; i++)
wait(&status);
}
I have trouble understanding why the pipes are being closed just before calling execvp and reading or writing any data. I believe it has something to do with passing EOF flags to processes so that they can stop reading writing however I don't see how that helps before any actual data is pushed to the pipe. I'd appreciate a clear explanation. Thanks.

Answer 1

I have trouble understanding why the pipes are being closed just before calling execvp and reading or writing any data.
The pipes are not being closed. Rather, some file descriptors associated with the pipe ends are being closed. Each child process is duping pipe-end file descriptors onto one or both of its standard streams, then closing all pipe-end file descriptors that it is not actually going to use, which is all of the ones stored in the pipes array. Each pipe itself remains open and usable as long as each end is open in at least one process, and each child process holds at least one end of one pipe open. Those are closed when the child processes terminate (or at least under the control of the child processes, post execvp()).
One reason to perform such closures is for tidiness and resource management. There is a limit on how many file descriptors a process may have open at once, so it is wise to avoiding leaving unneeded file descriptors open.
But also, functionally, a process reading from one of the pipes will not detect end of file until all open file descriptors associated with the write end of the pipe, in any process, are closed. That's what EOF on a pipe means, and it makes sense because as long as the write end is open anywhere, it is possible that more data will be written to it.