I am interested in creating a zombie process. To my understanding, zombie process happens when the parent process exits before the children process. However, I tried to recreate the zombie process using the following code:
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <sys/types.h>
#include <unistd.h>
int main ()
{
pid_t child_pid;
child_pid = fork ();
if (child_pid > 0) {
exit(0);
}
else {
sleep(100);
exit (0);
}
return 0;
}
However, this code exits right after execute which is expected. However, as I do
ps aux | grep a.out
I found a.out is just running as a normal process, rather than a zombie process as I expected.
The OS I am using is ubuntu 14.04 64 bit
Quoting:
To my understanding, zombie process happens when the parent process exits before the children process.
This is wrong. According to man 2 wait (see NOTES) :
A child that terminates, but has not been waited for becomes a "zombie".
So, if you want to create a zombie process, after the fork(2), the child-process should exit(), and the parent-process should sleep() before exiting, giving you time to observe the output of ps(1).
For instance, you can use the code below instead of yours, and use ps(1) while sleep()ing:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <unistd.h>
#include <sys/types.h>
#include <sys/wait.h>
int main(void)
{
pid_t pid;
int status;
if ((pid = fork()) < 0) {
perror("fork");
exit(1);
}
/* Child */
if (pid == 0)
exit(0);
/* Parent
* Gives you time to observe the zombie using ps(1) ... */
sleep(100);
/* ... and after that, parent wait(2)s its child's
* exit status, and prints a relevant message. */
pid = wait(&status);
if (WIFEXITED(status))
fprintf(stderr, "\n\t[%d]\tProcess %d exited with status %d.\n",
(int) getpid(), pid, WEXITSTATUS(status));
return 0;
}
A zombie or a "defunct process" in Linux is a process that has been completed, but its entry still remains in the process table due to lack of correspondence between the parent and child processes. Usually, a parent process keeps a check on the status of its child processes through the wait() function. When the child process has finished, the wait function signals the parent to completely exit the process from the memory. However, if the parent fails to call the wait function for any of its children, the child process remains alive in the system as a dead or zombie process. These zombie processes might accumulate, in large numbers, on your system and affect its performance.
Below is a c program to creating a Zombie-Process on our system Save this file as zombie.c:
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <sys/types.h>
#include <unistd.h>
int main ()
{
pid_t child_pid;
child_pid = fork ();
if (child_pid > 0) {
sleep (60);
}
else {
exit (0);
}
return 0;
}
The zombie process created through this code will run for 60 seconds. You can increase the time duration by specifying a time(in seconds) in the sleep() function.
Compile this program
gcc zombie.c
Now run the zombie program:
./a.out
The ps command will now also show this defunct process, open a new terminal and use the below command to check the defunct process:
aamir#aamir:~/process$ ps -ef | grep a.out
aamir 10171 3052 0 17:12 pts/0 00:00:00 ./a.out
aamir 10172 10171 0 17:12 pts/0 00:00:00 [a.out] <defunct> #Zombie process
aamir 10177 3096 0 17:12 pts/2 00:00:00 grep --color=auto a.out
Related
This question already has answers here:
Create zombie process
(2 answers)
Closed 1 year ago.
my task is to create zombie process. My code looks like this:
#include <unistd.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <sys/types.h>
#include <sys/wait.h>
int main() {
pid_t pid = fork();
if (pid == -1) {
printf("error\n");
}
else if (pid == 0) {
printf("Child %d\n", getpid());
printf("Parents %d\n", getppid());
printf("Waiting for my Child to complete\n");
exit(0);
}
else {
sleep(5);
printf("Parent %d\n",getpid());
}
return 0;
}
When I gcc and execute the file with ./a.out I get the following output:
Child 25097
Parents 25096
Waiting for my child to complete
Parent 25096 ( a few seconds later)
My task is to create a zombie process and print out the exit-state of the child process while being in parent process. Everything is a bit confusing to me because its the first time for me using Linux and C.
Do you have some tips/ hints for me, how to solve the task? Cause I'm not sure if everything is right. I also tried playing with wait(), waitpid() and WEXITSSTATUS(), but I'm not sure about it. And I used the ps x command to check if there is a different output but I didn't notice any changes.
Thanks in advance :)
This code will successfully create a zombie process.
After the call to fork, the child prints a few lines and exits, while the parent sleeps for 5 seconds. This means you'll have a zombie process for about 5 seconds while the parent is sleeping.
When the sleep is done, the parent prints something and exits. Once the parent exits the child is inherited by the init process, which will wait for the child and make it's pid disappear fro the pid list.
You can also use wait in the parent process, in which case the child is a zombie up until the parent calls wait.
I need to retrieve the PID of a process started by exec() or system(). I read on the subject and did my research, but I don't understand the suggestion of using fork() to do so.
Let's say I have the following code:
int pid = fork();
if (pid < 0 ) {
exit(1);
} else if (pid == 0 ) {
execlp("ls", "-a", NULL);
} else {
wait(0)
}
How to get the pid of the process started by execlp (or by system() if system was used instead)? I don't need to kill the process, I just need the PID to retrieve stats about it.
The exec* family of functions do not create new processes, instead they replace the execution context of the process they are called from, with the execution context of their target executable. The PID is maintained when this occurs.
#include <unistd.h>
#include <stdio.h>
int main(void) {
/* Normal execution */
puts("Hello");
/* Our programs contents get "replaced" by ls */
execlp("ls", "ls", "-l", NULL);
/* We never get here */
puts("World!");
}
fork, on the other hand, creates a new child process, which of course has its own PID. This child process carries on executing a copy of the same execution context it was spawned from; you can consider the execution to be "split" as soon as fork is called. fork returns 0 in the child process, and the PID of the child process in the parent (our original process).
The idea is to fork, and then use exec* to replace the execution context of the child process.
#include <unistd.h>
#include <stdio.h>
int main(void) {
pid_t pid;
/* Normal execution */
puts("Hello");
/* execution "splits" */
pid = fork();
if (pid == 0) {
/* Our child's execution context get "replaced" by ls */
execlp("ls", "ls", "-l", NULL);
} else {
/* still in the parent */
printf("Child PID is: %d\n", (int) pid);
}
/* We only get here in the parent */
puts("World!");
}
system is a wrapper around fork, exec* and and waitpid that blocks the calling process until the child process finishes its execution. The child's PID is not reported, because by the time parent can "act" again, the PID of the child is meaningless.
Error handling omitted for clarity of examples, but you should handle errors for fork, exec*, and wait* functions.
I want to write a program in which the parent creates exactly 1 child process. The child process should print its pid to the standard output and then finish. The parent process should waits until it is sure that the child has terminated. The parent terminates after it has waited for the child process.
Thats what I got so far:
#include <unistd.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <stdio.h>
int main(void)
{
int child;
child = fork();
if (child == 0)
{
printf("Child process has PID: %d. \n", getpid());
exit(0);
}
// how can the parent process find out it the child process was terminated successful?
printf("Child process terminated successfully\n");
return EXIT_SUCCESS;
}
How can the parent-process find out if the child process was terminated? I can't use wait() or waitpid() in this programm.
Thanks for your help!
When a child process terminates a SIGCHLD signal will be sent to the parent, by default the parent will ignore the SIGCHLD, however you can register a signal handler that will catch it.
You need to be careful what you do in the signal handler - quite a few standard function aren't safe to use.
The SIGCHLD approach turns up in code when the parent has it's own work to do and can't just wait for the child. If the parent just spawns children and then waits for them to finish the wait() and waitpid() are the best solution.
Finally if you don't call wait() or waitpid() you risk creating a zombie process, the child process expects it's parent to receive it's exit status through a call to one of these functions.
As I said in remark use the signal SIGCHLD, for instance :
#include <stdio.h>
#include <signal.h>
#include <unistd.h>
#include <sys/types.h>
#include <sys/wait.h>
void handler(int sig)
{
pid_t chpid = wait(NULL);
/* WARNING : to show the call of the handler, do not do that
in a 'real' code, we are in a handler of a signal */
printf("Child pid %d ended (signal %s)\n", chpid, sig);
/* does 'something' to allow the parent to know chpid
terminated in a way compatible with parent requirement */
}
int main(void)
{
signal(SIGCHLD, handler);
if (!fork())
{
printf("Child pid is %d\n", getpid());
sleep(1);
return 0;
}
printf("Parent pid is %d\n", getpid());
getchar();
return 0;
}
Note when the signal arrive you have to call wait(NULL) but because by definition the child terminated the function returns immediately
Compilation and execution :
pi#raspberrypi:/tmp $ gcc -pedantic -Wall -Wextra s.c
pi#raspberrypi:/tmp $ ./a.out
Parent pid is 21743
Child pid is 21744
Child pid 21744 ended (signal 17)
<enter>
pi#raspberrypi:/tmp $
Of course the signal 17 is SIGCHLD because it is the only one the program catches
I am learning fork() in Linux, and here is my program:
1 #include <stdio.h>
2 #include <stdlib.h>
3 #include <unistd.h>
4 int main(void){
5 int pid;
6 pid = fork();
7 if(pid < 0){
8 exit(1);
9 }
10 if(pid == 0){
11 fork();
12 fork();
13 printf("pid:%d ppid:%d\n",getpid(),getppid());
14 exit(0);
15 }
16 else{
17 printf("parent pid:%d ppid:%d\n",getpid(),getppid());
18 exit(0);
19 }
20
21 }
Sometimes it worked fine, with result like this:
./test1.out
parent pid:27596 ppid:21425
pid:27599 ppid:27597
pid:27597 ppid:27596
pid:27598 ppid:27597
pid:27600 ppid:27598
But the result was not consistent, more often than not it worked like this:
parent pid:27566 ppid:21425
pid:27567 ppid:27566
pid:27568 ppid:27567
pid:27569 ppid:1599
pid:27570 ppid:1599
Which makes no sense to me, so I typed $ps aux to find out what process 1599 is:(with some columns deleted)
USER PID VSZ RSS STAT START COMMAND
linux 1599 63236 6316 Ss 09:03 /lib/systemd/systemd --user
Can anybody help me straighted things up?
The "inconsistency" you observed is because sometimes, the parent process(es) exited before their child process(es) terminated. So, these child processes become "orphans" as their
parent processes are not waiting for them. As a result, they are "re-parented" to the init process.
While traditionally the process id of the "init" process is 1, it's not always true. POSIX leaves it as implementation-defined:
The parent process ID of all of the existing child processes and
zombie processes of the calling process shall be set to the process ID
of an implementation-defined system process. That is, these processes
shall be inherited by a special system process.
Thus you see a particular PID as the parent (1599 in your example), which happens to be "init" process equivalent on your Linux.
The systemd is an init variant used in Debian Linux distributions - which follows a slightly more complicated implementation.
In essense, what you observed is pretty normal. Ideally, you should reap all the processes in order to avoid zombie processes.
I suppose that, sometimes, a race condition happens, and the parent dies before the child. Hence, the child becomes children from init process. In your case, that must be systemd.
Anyway, be advised that running fork(); fork(); will produce 4 processes, which is (probably) not what you intend. Use control structure as you did with the first one to have fine control on the behaviour of your program.
It is because the parent process terminates first.
In Linux there are no ophan processes. They are assigned to the init process.
If you want to control your processes so that child process terminates first, make parent process wait. Using wait() sys_call.
Example:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <unistd.h>
int main(void)
{
int pid;
int pid2;
pid = fork();
if(pid < 0){
exit(1);
}
if(pid == 0){ // child process
pid2 = fork()
if (pid2 < 0)
exit(1);
if (pid2 == 0)
{
printf("pid:%dppid:%d\n",getpid(),getppid());
exit(0);
}
wait();
printf("pid:%d ppid:%d\n",getpid(),getppid());
exit(0);
}
else{ // parent process
wait();
printf("parent pid:%d ppid:%d\n",getpid(),getppid());
exit(0);
}
return 0;
}
systemd is an init system used in Linux distributions to bootstrap the
user space and manage all processes subsequently
How does re-parenting of stopped process heppens? Why does stopped process just terminates after re-parenting?
More precisely, suppose I have a code like this
#include <sys/types.h>
#include <sys/wait.h>
#include <unistd.h>
#include <sys/user.h>
#include <sys/syscall.h>
#include <stdio.h>
int main(void) {
pid_t child;
child = fork();
if (child == 0) {
int t = 0;
while (true) {
printf("%d. I'm %d, my parent is %d\n", t++, getpid(), getppid());
sleep(1);
}
} else {
printf("I'm the parent. My pid is %d\n", getpid());
printf("Starting to wait for 30 seconds\n");
sleep(30);
printf("Done waiting, aborting\n");
}
}
When I run this code the child process works and parent process just sleeps. After 30 seconds passed the parent process terminates and the child process now becomes a child of init and just continues running. Everything is normal.
But if I run this code and in first 30 seconds of it's execution I also run
kill -SIGSTOP <child_pid>
Then the child process stops (T state in ps xaf) and the parent process sleeps. After 30 second passed the parent process returns from sleep and just terminates (as it reached the end of main) but the child process instead of being re-parented to init in stopped state just terminates. I don't see it in ps xaf and if run lastcomm I see this output:
a.out F X equi pts/5 0.00 secs Wed Mar 16 17:44
Why is this happening that stopped process dies after re-parenting? Is it possible in linux to re-parrent stopped process?
From http://www.gnu.org/software/libc/manual/html_node/Job-Control-Signals.html
When a process in an orphaned process group (see Orphaned Process
Groups) receives a SIGTSTP, SIGTTIN, or SIGTTOU signal and does not
handle it, the process does not stop. Stopping the process would
probably not be very useful, since there is no shell program that will
notice it stop and allow the user to continue it. What happens instead
depends on the operating system you are using. Some systems may do
nothing; others may deliver another signal instead, such as SIGKILL or
SIGHUP. On GNU/Hurd systems, the process dies with SIGKILL; this
avoids the problem of many stopped, orphaned processes lying around
the system.
See also: What's the difference between SIGSTOP and SIGTSTP?