Why does waitpid in a signal handler need to loop? - c

Question

I read in an ebook that waitpid(-1, &status, WNOHANG) should be put under a while loop so that if multiple child process exits simultaniously , they are all get reaped.
I tried this concept by creating and terminating 2 child processes at the same time and reaping it by waitpid WITHOUT using loop. And the are all been reaped .
Question is , is it very necessary to put waitpid under a loop ?
#include<stdio.h>
#include<sys/wait.h>
#include<signal.h>
int func(int pid)
{
if(pid < 0)
return 0;
func(pid - 1);
}
void sighand(int sig)
{
int i=45;
int stat, pid;
printf("Signal caught\n");
//while( (
pid = waitpid(-1, &stat, WNOHANG);
//) > 0){
printf("Reaped process %d----%d\n", pid, stat);
func(pid);
}
int main()
{
int i;
signal(SIGCHLD, sighand);
pid_t child_id;
if( (child_id=fork()) == 0 ) //child process
{
printf("Child ID %d\n",getpid());
printf("child exiting ...\n");
}
else
{
if( (child_id=fork()) == 0 ) //child process
{
printf("Child ID %d\n",getpid());
printf("child exiting ...\n");
}
else
{
printf("------------Parent with ID %d \n",getpid());
printf("parent exiting ....\n");
sleep(10);
sleep(10);
}
}
}

Answer 1

Yes.
Okay, I'll elaborate.
Each call to waitpid reaps one, and only one, child. Since you put the call inside the signal handler, there is no guarantee that the second child will exit before you finish executing the first signal handler. For two processes that is okay (the pending signal will be handled when you finish), but for more, it might be that two children will finish while you're still handling another one. Since signals are not queued, you will miss a notification.
If that happens, you will not reap all children. To avoid that problem, the loop recommendation was introduced. If you want to see it happen, try running your test with more children. The more you run, the more likely you'll see the problem.
With that out of the way, let's talk about some other issues.
First, your signal handler calls printf. That is a major no-no. Very few functions are signal handler safe, and printf definitely isn't one. You can try and make your signal handler safer, but a much saner approach is to put in a signal handler that merely sets a flag, and then doing the actual wait call in your main program's flow.
Since your main flow is, typically, to call select/epoll, make sure to look up pselect and epoll_pwait, and to understand what they do and why they are needed.
Even better (but Linux specific), look up signalfd. You might not need the signal handler at all.
Edited to add:
The loop does not change the fact that two signal deliveries are merged into one handler call. What it does do is that this one call handles all pending events.
Of course, once that's the case, you must use WNOHANG. The same artifacts that cause signals to be merged might also cause you to handle an event for which a signal is yet to be delivered.
If that happens, then once your first signal handler exists, it will get called again. This time, however, there will be no pending events (as the events were already extracted by the loop). If you do not specify WNOHANG, your wait block, and the program will be stuck indefinitely.