I understood that If one file is used by one process, the inode->i_count.counter is incremented.
I made a simple C program to open a file wihout closing it (infinite waiting loop), and this i_count is not incremented, is it normal ?
int main(){
FILE *file1 = NULL;
file1 = fopen("file1", "r");
while(1)
sleep(1);
if (file1)
fclose(file1);
return 0;
}
Related
I want to trigger a callback when data is written on a file descriptor. For this I have set up a pipe and a reader thread, which reads the pipe. When it has data, the callback is called with the data.
The problem is that the reader is stuck on the read syscall. Destruction order is as follows:
Close write end of pipe (I expected this to trigger a return from blocking read, but apparently it doesn't)
Wait for reader thread to exit
Restore old file descriptor context (If stdout was redirected to the pipe, it no longer is)
Close read end of pipe
When the write end of the pipe is closed, on the read end, the read() system call returns 0 if it is blocking.
Here is an example program creating a reader thread from a pipe. The main program gets the data from stdin thanks to fgets() and write those data into the pipe. On the other side, the thread reads the pipe and triggers the callback passed as parameter. The thread stops when it gets 0 from the read() of the pipe (meaning that the main thread closed the write side):
#include <stdio.h>
#include <errno.h>
#include <pthread.h>
#include <unistd.h>
#include <string.h>
int pfd[2];
void read_cbk(char *data, size_t size)
{
int rc;
printf("CBK triggered, %zu bytes: %s", size, data);
}
void *reader(void *p){
char data[128];
void (* cbk)(char *data, size_t size) = (void (*)(char *, size_t))p;
int rc;
do {
rc = read(pfd[0], data, sizeof(data));
switch(rc) {
case 0: fprintf(stderr, "Thread: rc=0\n");
break;
case -1: fprintf(stderr, "Thread: rc=-1, errno=%d\n", errno);
break;
default: cbk(data, (size_t)rc);
}
} while(rc > 0);
}
int main(){
pthread_t treader;
int rc;
char input[128];
char *p;
pipe(pfd);
pthread_create(&treader, NULL, reader , read_cbk);
do {
// fgets() insert terminating \n and \0 in the buffer
// If EOF (that is to say CTRL-D), fgets() returns NULL
p = fgets(input, sizeof(input), stdin);
if (p != NULL) {
// Send the terminating \0 to the reader to facilitate printf()
rc = write(pfd[1], input, strlen(p) + 1);
}
} while (p);
close(pfd[1]);
pthread_join(treader, NULL);
close(pfd[0]);
}
Example of execution:
$ gcc t.c -o t -lpthread
$ ./t
azerty is not qwerty
CBK triggered, 22 bytes: azerty is not qwerty
string
CBK triggered, 8 bytes: string
# Here I typed CTRL-D to generate an EOF on stdin
Thread: rc=0
I found the problem. For redirection, the following has to be done
Create a pipe. This creates two file descriptors. One for reading, and one for writing.
dup2 so the original file descriptor is an alias to the write end of the pipe. This increments the use count of the write end by one
Thus, before synchronizing, I have to restore the context. This means that the following order is correct:
Close write end of pipe
Restore old file descriptor context
Wait for reader thread to exit
Close read end of pipe
For reference to the question, step 2 and 3 must be reorder in order to avoid deadlock.
About this code:
FILE *fp;
pid_t parentId = getpid();
fp = fopen("file.txt","rw");
fork();
fputc("a",fp)
fork();
fputc("b",fp)
if (getpid() == parentId) {
while(wait(NULL) != -1); // wait for all child processes to terminate
fclose(fp); // close the file handle
}
I want to understand how many read/writes do I have here?
We have 1 access to read the i-Node itself.
We have 6 characters that are being written to the file from the 4 processes along the code - but how many read and writes are there in this case? Do we have to read every character and then write it to the file, and then read and right the i-Node metadata?
Thanks a lot!
i'm using linux as operating system and trying to communicate three processes with pipe and file. It should work with any file put on STDIN.
And pipe works just fine, but second process is unavailable to write one char into file properly or third to read.
Firstly of course i initialize function as semlock and semunlock and opening pipe is also there. I appreciate any help cause i have no clue.
if (!(PID[1] = fork ())) {
int BUF_SIZE = 4096;
char d[BUF_SIZE];
while (fgets (d, BUF_SIZE, stdin) != NULL) {
write (mypipe[1], &d, BUF_SIZE);
}
}
if (!(PID[2] = fork ())) {
int reading_size = 0;
char r;
close (mypipe[1]);
semlock (semid1);
while (reading_size = read (mypipe[0], &r, 1)) {
if ((file = fopen ("proces2.txt", "w")) == NULL) {
warn ("error !!!");
exit (1);
}
fputc (r, file);
fclose (file);
semunlock (semid2);
}
}
if (!(PID[3] = fork ())) {
char x;
semlock (semid2);
do {
if ((plikProces3 = fopen ("proces2.txt", "r")) == NULL) {
warn ("Blad przy otwarciu pliku do odczytu !!!");
exit (1);
}
i = getc (plikProces3);
o = fprintf (stdout, "%c", i);
fclose (plikProces3);
semunlock (semid1);
} while (i != EOF);
}
What makes you think the child runs first? You haven't waited for the child process to finish so can hit EOF reading the file, before the previous child has written. Shouldn't the last fork() call be a wait, so you know the file was written? As it stands you have 4 processes, NOT 3!!
Then you are closing the mypipe[1] in the 2nd child process which as it is a forked copy, does not close the pipe inthe first child. You also are trying to write BUFSIZ characters, so you appear to be trying to write out more characters than were written, try "write (mypipe[1], &d, strlen(d));".
It looks very odd, to have the fopen() & fclose() within the character read/write loop. You really want to re-open & re-write 1 character into the file over and over?
Similarly the process2 file seems to be re-opened so the first character within would be written again and again, if it's non-empty.
There are bound to be other bugs, but that should help you for now.
I am writing a "sleepy" device driver for an Operating Systems class.
The way it works is, the user accesses the device via read()/write().
When the user writes to the device like so: write(fd, &wait, size), the device is put to sleep for the amount of time in seconds of the value of wait. If the wait time expires then driver's write method returns 0 and the program finishes. But if the user reads from the driver while a process is sleeping on a wait queue, then the driver's write method returns immediately with the number of seconds the sleeping process had left to wait before the timeout would have occurred on its own.
Another catch is that 10 instances of the device are created, and each of the 10 devices must be independent of each other. So a read to device 1 must only wake up sleeping processes on device 1.
Much code has been provided, and I have been charged with the task of mainly writing the read() and write() methods for the driver.
The way I have tried to solve the problem of keeping the devices independent of each other is to include two global static arrays of size 10. One of type wait_head_queue_t, and one of type Int(Bool flags). Both of these arrays are initialized once when I open the device via open(). The problem is that when I call wake_up_interruptible(), nothing happens, and the program terminates upon timeout. Here is my write method:
ssize_t sleepy_write(struct file *filp, const char __user *buf, size_t count, loff_t *f_pos){
struct sleepy_dev *dev = (struct sleepy_dev *)filp->private_data;
ssize_t retval = 0;
int mem_to_be_copied = 0;
if (mutex_lock_killable(&dev->sleepy_mutex))
{
return -EINTR;
}
// check size
if(count != 4) // user must provide 4 byte Int
{
return EINVAL; // = 22
}
// else if the user provided valid sized input...
else
{
if((mem_to_be_copied = copy_from_user(&long_buff[0], buf, count)))
{
return -EFAULT;
}
// check for negative wait time entered by user
if(long_buff[0] > -1)// "long_buff[]"is global,for now only holds 1 value
{
proc_read_flags[MINOR(dev->cdev.dev)] = 0; //****** flag array
retval = wait_event_interruptible_timeout(wqs[MINOR(dev->cdev.dev)], proc_read_flags[MINOR(dev->cdev.dev)] == 1, long_buff[0] * HZ) / HZ;
proc_read_flags[MINOR(dev->cdev.dev)] = 0; // MINOR numbers for each
// device correspond to array indices
// devices 0 - 9
// "wqs" is array of wait queues
}
else
{
printk(KERN_INFO "user entered negative value for sleep time\n");
}
}
mutex_unlock(&dev->sleepy_mutex);
return retval;}
Unlike the many examples on this topic, I am switching the flag back to zero immediately before the call to wait_event_interruptible_timeout() because flag values seem to be lingering between subsequent runs of the program. Here is the code for my read method:
ssize_t sleepy_read(struct file *filp, char __user *buf, size_t count,
loff_t *f_pos){
struct sleepy_dev *dev = (struct sleepy_dev *)filp->private_data;
ssize_t retval = 0;
if (mutex_lock_killable(&dev->sleepy_mutex))
return -EINTR;
// switch the flag
proc_read_flags[MINOR(dev->cdev.dev)] = 1; // again device minor numbers
// correspond to array indices
// TODO: this is not waking up the process in write!
// wake up the queue
wake_up_interruptible(&wqs[MINOR(dev->cdev.dev)]);
mutex_unlock(&dev->sleepy_mutex);
return retval;}
The way I am trying to test the program is to have two main.c's, one for writing to the device and one for reading from the device, and I just ./a.out them in separate consoles in my ubuntu installation in Virtual Box. Another thing, the way it is set up now, neither the writing or reading a.outs return until timeout occurs. I apologize for the spotty formatting of the code. I'm not sure exactly what is going on here, so any help would be much appreciated! Thanks!
Your write method hold sleepy_mutex while wait event. So read method waits on mutex_lock_killable(&dev->sleepy_mutex) while the mutex become unlocked by the writer. It is occured only when writer's timeout exceeds, and write method returns. It is the behaviour you observe.
Usually, wait_event* is executed outside of any critical section. That can be achieved by using _lock-suffixed variants of such macros, or simply wrapping cond argument of such macros with spinlock acquire/release pair:
int check_cond()
{
int res;
spin_lock(&lock);
res = <cond>;
spin_unlock(&lock);
return res;
}
...
wait_event_interruptible(&wq, check_cond());
Unfortunately, wait_event-family macros cannot be used, when condition checking should be protected with a mutex. In that case, you can use wait_woken() function with manual condition checking code. Or rewrite your code without needs of mutex lock/unlock around condition checking.
For achive "reader wake writer, if it is sleep" functionality, you can adopt code from that answer https://stackoverflow.com/a/29765695/3440745.
Writer code:
//Declare local variable at the beginning of the function
int cflag;
...
// Outside of any critical section(after mutex_unlock())
cflag = proc_read_flags[MINOR(dev->cdev.dev)];
wait_event_interruptible_timeout(&wqs[MINOR(dev->cdev.dev)],
proc_read_flags[MINOR(dev->cdev.dev)] != cflag, long_buff[0]*HZ);
Reader code:
// Mutex holding protects this flag's increment from concurrent one.
proc_read_flags[MINOR(dev->cdev.dev)]++;
wake_up_interruptible_all(&wqs[MINOR(dev->cdev.dev)]);
Buffered IO streams have a strange behavior on fork().
In the sample snippet shown below, the file being read is 252 bytes in size. After the fork(), the child is successfully reading a line and printing on the screen. however, when the control goes back to the parent, the file offset is set to the end of file for some reason and the parent process isn't able to read anything from the stream. If fork() creates a dup of the file descriptors ( which works fine with replicating the same program using system calls read() and write() ), one would expect the parent process to read the next line from the stream but that doesn't seem to happen here. File offset is set to the end of file when the control reaches parent. Can someone shed some light on this ?
int main(void)
{
char buffer[80];
FILE *file;
pid_t pid;
int status;
/* Open the file: */
file = fopen(FILENAME, "r");
if ((pid = fork()) == 0){
fgets(buffer, sizeof(buffer), file);
printf("%s", buffer);
}
else{
waitpid(pid, &status, 0);
printf("Offset [%d]\n", ftell(file));
fgets(buffer, sizeof(buffer), file);
printf("%s", buffer);
}
}
fgets() in the child process is fully buffered as it's reading data from file. On my system a fully buffered buffer is of size 1024..So a single read() has the entire contents of the file (252 bytes) in the fgets() buffer. So as the control gets back to the parent, from the child, the offset is set to the end of the file.
Doing a fflush() in the child process, before it returns, ensures the data in the fgets() buffer is discarded and therefore the file offest is properly set back when the control reaches the parent.