My mini-shell program accepts pipe command, for example, ls -l | wc -l and uses excevp to execute these commands.
My problem is if there is no fork() for execvp, the pipe command works well but the shell terminates afterward. If there is a fork() for execvp, dead loop happens. And I cannot fix it.
code:
void run_pipe(char **args){
int ps[2];
pipe(ps);
pid_t pid = fork();
pid_t child_pid;
int child_status;
if(pid == 0){ // child process
close(1);
close(ps[0]);
dup2(ps[1], 1);
//e.g. cmd[0] = "ls", cmd[1] = "-l"
char ** cmd = split(args[index], " \t");
//if fork here, program cannot continue with infinite loop somewhere
if(fork()==0){
if (execvp(cmd[0],cmd)==-1){
printf("%s: Command not found.\n", args[0]);
}
}
wait(0);
}
else{ // parent process
close(0);
close(ps[1]);
dup2(ps[0],0);
//e.g. cmd[0] = "wc", cmd[1] = "-l"
char ** cmd = split(args[index+1], " \t");
//if fork here, program cannot continue with infinite loop somewhere
if(fork()==0){
if (execvp(cmd[0],cmd)==-1){
printf("%s: Command not found.\n", args[0]);
}
}
wait(0);
waitpid(pid, &child_status, 0);
}
}
I know fork() is needed for excevp in order to not terminate the shell program, but I still cannot fix it. Any help will be appreciated, thank you!
How should I make two children parallel?
pid = fork();
if( pid == 0){
// child
} else{ // parent
pid1 = fork();
if(pid1 == 0){
// second child
} else // parent
}
is this correct?
Yes, execvp() replaces the program in which it is called with a different one. If you want to spawn another program without ending execution of the one that does the spawning (i.e. a shell) then that program must fork() to create a new process, and have the new process perform the execvp().
Your program source exhibits a false parallelism that probably either confuses you or reflects a deeper confusion. You structure the behavior of the first child forked in just the same way as the behavior of the parent process after the fork, but what should be parallel is the behavior of the first child and the behavior of the second child.
One outcome is that your program has too many forks. The initial process should fork exactly twice -- once for each child it wants to spawn -- and neither child should fork because it's already a process dedicated to one of the commands you want to run. In your actual program, however, the first child does fork. That case is probably rescued by the child also wait()ing for the grandchild, but it's messy and poor form.
Another outcome is that when you set up the second child's file descriptors, you manipulate the parent's, prior to forking, instead of manipulating the child's after forking. Those changes will persist in the parent process, which I'm pretty confident is not what you want. This is probably why the shell seems to hang: when run_pipe() returns (the shell's standard input has been changed to the read end of the pipe).
Additionally, the parent process should close both ends of the pipe after the children have both been forked, for more or less the same reason that the children must each close the end they are not using. In the end, there will be exactly one open copy of the file descriptor for each end of the pipe, one in one child and the other in the other. Failing to do this correctly can also cause a hang under some circumstances, as the processes you fork may not terminate.
Here's a summary of what you want the program to do:
The original process sets up the pipe.
The original process forks twice, once for each command.
Each subprocess manipulates its own file descriptors to use the correct end of the pipe as the appropriate standard FD, and closes the other end of the pipe.
Each subprocess uses execvp() (or one of the other functions in that family) to run the requested program
the parent closes its copies of the file descriptors for both ends of the pipe
the parent uses wait() or waitpid() to collect two children.
Note, too, that you should check the return values of all your function calls and provide appropriate handling for errors.
Related
I am working on a tiny shell(tsh) implemented in C(it's an assignment). One part of assignment belongs to PIPING. I have to pipe a command's output to another command. e.g:ls -l | sort
When I run the shell, every command that I execute on it, is processed by a child process that it spawns. After the child finishes the result is returned. For piping I wanted to implement a harcoded example first to check how it works. I wrote a method, that partially works. The problems is when I run the pipe command, after child process finishes, the whole program quits with it! Obviously I am not handling the child process signal properly(Method code below).
My Question:
How does process management with pipe() works? if i run a command ls -l | sort does it create a child process for ls -l and another process for sort ? From the piping examples that I have seen so far, only one process is created(fork()).
When the second command (sort from our example) is processed, how can i get its process ID?
EDIT: Also while running this code I get the result twice. don't know why it runs twice, there is no loop in there.
Here is my code:
pid_t pipeIt(void){
pid_t pid;
int pipefd[2];
if(pipe(pipefd)){
unix_error("pipe");
return -1;
}
if((pid = fork()) <0){
unix_error("fork");
return -1;
}
if(pid == 0){
close(pipefd[0]);
dup2(pipefd[1],1);
close(pipefd[1]);
if(execl("/bin/ls", "ls", (char *)NULL) < 0){
unix_error("/bin/ls");
return -1;
}// End of if command wasn't successful
}// End of pid == 0
else{
close(pipefd[1]);
dup2(pipefd[0],0);
close(pipefd[0]);
if(execl("/usr/bin/tr", "tr", "e", "f", (char *)NULL) < 0){
unix_error("/usr/bin/tr");
return -1;
}
}
return pid;
}// End of pipeIt
Yes, the shell must fork to exec each subprocess. Remember that when you call one of the execve() family of functions, it replaces the current process image with the exec'ed one. Your shell cannot continue to process further commands if it directly execs a subprocess, because thereafter it no longer exists (except as the subprocess).
To fix it, simply fork() again in the pid == 0 branch, and exec the ls command in that child. Remember to wait() for both (all) child processes if you don't mean the pipeline to be executed asynchronously.
Yes, you do need to call fork at least twice, once for each program in the pipeline. Remember that exec replaces the program image of the current process, so your shell stops existing the moment you start running sort or (tr).
Using a fairly standard fork process:
int pipe_to_child[2];
int pipe_from_child[2];
int child_exit_status = -1;
pid_t child_pid = fork();
if (child_pid == 0) {
close(pipe_from_child[0]); // close their read end
close(pipe_to_child[1]); // Close their write end
dup2(pipe_to_child[0], STDIN_FILENO); // Tie the in pipe to stdin
dup2(pipe_from_child[1], STDOUT_FILENO); // Tie stdout to the out pipe
// Run the child process
execve(file_to_run, argv_for_prog, env_for_prog);
}
else {
close(pipe_from_child[1]); // close their write end
close(pipe_to_child[0]); // Close their read end
if (input_to_prog != NULL) write(pipe_to_child[1], input_to_prog, strlen(input_to_prog)); // Send the stdin stuff
close(pipe_to_child[1]); // Done so send EOF
// Wait for the child to end
waitpid(child_pid, &child_exit_status, 0);
// Do post end-of-child stuff
}
This generally works as expected.
However, when the child process, a shell script, sets a further process off in the background. Even though the child process then exits (and is no longer listed by ps), the waitpid doesn't return.
The script is this case is meant to start inadyn-mt (a DDNS updater) running in the background.
#!/bin/sh
inadyn-mt --background
(If I put an & after inadyn-mt it makes no difference)
It turns out that the issue is that the pipes don't get closed. Although the child process exits fine, because it has spawned a further process, this process (even though it doesn't want them) is tied to the pipes to the child's stdin and stdout. The solution I used was to not set up the pipes when I was going to spin off a child from the child.
I am working on a tiny shell(tsh) implemented in C(it's an assignment). One part of assignment belongs to PIPING. I have to pipe a command's output to another command. e.g:ls -l | sort
When I run the shell, every command that I execute on it, is processed by a child process that it spawns. After the child finishes the result is returned. For piping I wanted to implement a harcoded example first to check how it works. I wrote a method, that partially works. The problems is when I run the pipe command, after child process finishes, the whole program quits with it! Obviously I am not handling the child process signal properly(Method code below).
My Question:
How does process management with pipe() works? if i run a command ls -l | sort does it create a child process for ls -l and another process for sort ? From the piping examples that I have seen so far, only one process is created(fork()).
When the second command (sort from our example) is processed, how can i get its process ID?
EDIT: Also while running this code I get the result twice. don't know why it runs twice, there is no loop in there.
Here is my code:
pid_t pipeIt(void){
pid_t pid;
int pipefd[2];
if(pipe(pipefd)){
unix_error("pipe");
return -1;
}
if((pid = fork()) <0){
unix_error("fork");
return -1;
}
if(pid == 0){
close(pipefd[0]);
dup2(pipefd[1],1);
close(pipefd[1]);
if(execl("/bin/ls", "ls", (char *)NULL) < 0){
unix_error("/bin/ls");
return -1;
}// End of if command wasn't successful
}// End of pid == 0
else{
close(pipefd[1]);
dup2(pipefd[0],0);
close(pipefd[0]);
if(execl("/usr/bin/tr", "tr", "e", "f", (char *)NULL) < 0){
unix_error("/usr/bin/tr");
return -1;
}
}
return pid;
}// End of pipeIt
Yes, the shell must fork to exec each subprocess. Remember that when you call one of the execve() family of functions, it replaces the current process image with the exec'ed one. Your shell cannot continue to process further commands if it directly execs a subprocess, because thereafter it no longer exists (except as the subprocess).
To fix it, simply fork() again in the pid == 0 branch, and exec the ls command in that child. Remember to wait() for both (all) child processes if you don't mean the pipeline to be executed asynchronously.
Yes, you do need to call fork at least twice, once for each program in the pipeline. Remember that exec replaces the program image of the current process, so your shell stops existing the moment you start running sort or (tr).
My question is extension of this one: popen creates an extra sh process
Motives:
1) My program need to create a child which does tail on a file. I need to process the output line by line. That is why I am using popen because it returns FILE *. I can easily fetch single line, do what I need to do and print it.
One problem with popen is that you do not get pid of child (tail command in my case).
2) My program should not exit before its child is done. So I need to do wait; but without pid, I cannot do it.
How can I achieve both the goals?
A possible (kludge) solution: do execvp("tail -f file > tmpfile") and the keep reading that tmpfile. I am not sure how good this solution is, though.
Why aren't you using pipe/fork/exec method?
pid_t pid = 0;
int pipefd[2];
FILE* output;
char line[256];
int status;
pipe(pipefd); //create a pipe
pid = fork(); //span a child process
if (pid == 0)
{
// Child. Let's redirect its standard output to our pipe and replace process with tail
close(pipefd[0]);
dup2(pipefd[1], STDOUT_FILENO);
dup2(pipefd[1], STDERR_FILENO);
execl("/usr/bin/tail", "/usr/bin/tail", "-f", "path/to/your/file", (char*) NULL);
}
//Only parent gets here. Listen to what the tail says
close(pipefd[1]);
output = fdopen(pipefd[0], "r");
while(fgets(line, sizeof(line), output)) //listen to what tail writes to its standard output
{
//if you need to kill the tail application, just kill it:
if(something_goes_wrong)
kill(pid, SIGKILL);
}
//or wait for the child process to terminate
waitpid(pid, &status, 0);
You can use pipe, a function of the exec* family and fdopen. This is non-standard, but so is popen.
You don't need to wait. Just read the pipe up to EOF.
execvp("tail -f file > tmpfile") won't work, redirection is a feature of the shell and you're not running the shell here. Even if it worked it would be an awful solution. Suppose you have read to the end of the file, but the child process has not ended yet. What do you do?
You can use wait as it doesn't want a PID to wait for but simply waits for the any child process to exit. If you have created other child processes you can keep track of them, and if wait returns an unknown PID you can assume it's from your popen process.
I'm not sure why you need the process ID of the child. When the child exits, your pipe read will return an EOF. If you need to terminate the child, just close the pipe.
I have to write program that create process using pipe().
My first task is to write a parent process that generates four child processes using the fork() function.
Once the fork() is successful, replace the child process with another process rover1, rover2, rover3, and rover4, though all of them have the same code.
The function of the processes is as follows.
Each child process is initially given its own number. It receives a new number from the parent. Using the following formula it creates its own new number as follows and forwards it to the parent:
mynumber = (3 * mynumber + 4 * numberreceived)/7
This process continues until the parent sends the message that the system is stable. The parent also has its initial number. It receives numbers of all the children and computes its new number as follows:
mynumber = (3 * mynumber + numbers sent by all the children)/7
The parent will send this number to all its children. This process will continue until the parent finds that its number is not changing anymore. At that time it will tell the children the system has become stable.
This is what I did but my professor said I have to use exec() to execute the child and replace child process with another child process. I am not sure how to use exec(). Could you please help me with this.
I am attaching only first child generation.
// I included stdio.h, unistd.h stdlib.h and errno.h
int main(void)
{
// Values returned from the four fork() calls
pid_t rover1, rover2, rover3, rover4;
int parentnumber, mynumber1, mynumber2, mynumber3, mynumber4;
int childownnumber1 = 0, status = 1, childownnumber2 = 0,
childownnumber3 = 0, childownnumber4 = 0, numberreceived = 0;
printf("Enter parent number: ");
printf("%d", parentnumber);
printf("Enter each children number");
printf("%d %d %d %d", mynumber1, mynumber2, mynumber3, mynumber4);
// Create pipes for communication between child and parent
int p1[2], p2[2];
// Attempt to open pipe
if (pipe(p1) == -1) {
perror("pipe call error");
exit(1);
}
// Attempt to open pipe
if (pipe(p2) == -1) {
perror("pipe call error");
exit(1);
}
// Parent process generates 4 child processes
rover1 = fork();
// if fork() returns 0, we're in the child process;
// call exec() for each child to replace itself with another process
if (rover1 == 0) {
for(; numberreceived != 1; ) {
close(p1[1]); // Close write end of pipe
close(p2[0]); // Close read end of second pipe
// Read parent's number from pipe
read(p1[0], &numberreceived, sizeof(int));
if (numberreceived == 1) {
// System stable, end child process
close(p1[0]);
close(p2[1]);
_exit(0); // End child process
}
mynumber1 = (int)((3*mynumber1 + 4*numberreceived)/7.0);
printf("\nrover1 number: ");
printf("%i", mynumber1);
// Write to pipe
write(p2[1], &mynumber1, sizeof(int));
}
}
/* Error:
* If fork() returns a negative number, an error happened;
* output error message
*/
if (rover1 < 0) {
fprintf(stderr,
"can't fork, child process 1 not created, error %d\n",
errno);
exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
}
}
The exec family of functions is used to replace the current process with a new process. Note the use of the word replace. Once exec is called, the current process is gone and the new process starts. If you want to create a separate process, you must first fork, and then exec the new binary within the child process.
Using the exec functions is similar to executing a program from the command line. The program to execute as well as the arguments passed to the program are provided in the call to the exec function.
For example, the following execcommand* is the equivalent to the subsequent shell command:
execl("/bin/ls", "/bin/ls", "-r", "-t", "-l", (char *) 0);
/bin/ls -r -t -l
* Note that "arg0" is the command/file name to execute
Since this is homework, it is important to have a good understanding of this process. You could start by reading documentation on pipe, fork, and exec combined with a few tutorials to gain a better understanding each step.
The following links should help to get you started:
IBM developerWorks: Delve into UNIX process creation
YoLinux Tutorial: Fork, Exec and Process control
Pipe, Fork, Exec and Related Topics
If you are supposed to use exec, then you should split your program into two binaries.
Basically, the code that now gets executed by the child should be in the second binary and should be invoked with exec.
Before calling one of the exec family of functions, you'll also need to redirect the pipe descriptors to the new process' standard input/output using dup2. This way the code in the second binary that gets exec'd won't be aware of the pipe and will just read/write to the standard input/output.
It's also worth noting that some of the data you are using now in the child process is inherited from the parent through the fork. When using exec the child won't share the data nor the code of the parent, so maybe you can consider transmitting the needed data through the pipe as well.