libstore/gc.cc: ignore ESRCH when reading /proc #2223
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
If a process disappears between the time /proc/[pid]/maps is opened and the time it is read, the read() syscall will return ESRCH. This should be ignored.
|
Thanks! |
symphorien
added a commit
to symphorien/nix-du
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 11, 2018
This reverts commit 44696d2. the real cause was NixOS/nix#2223
This was referenced Jun 16, 2018
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
When running
nix-store --gc --print-roots, nix walks/proc/which is inherently racy. When unlucky (this happened to me on travis)nix-storefails witherror: reading from file: No such process. It seems the reason is that if a process disappears between the time/proc/[pid]/mapsis opened andthe time it is read, the
read()syscall will returnESRCH. This should be ignored.I tried to run the testsuite, but some test failed before my commit. So I can only claim that no new failing test are introduced. Also, nix-du's test suite seems to pass more reliably.