From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 37324 invoked by alias); 21 Mar 2017 15:05:44 -0000 Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Received: (qmail 37309 invoked by uid 89); 21 Mar 2017 15:05:44 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM,SPF_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=much!, much X-HELO: mail-yw0-f180.google.com Received: from mail-yw0-f180.google.com (HELO mail-yw0-f180.google.com) (209.85.161.180) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 15:05:42 +0000 Received: by mail-yw0-f180.google.com with SMTP id p77so111505288ywg.1 for ; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 08:05:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=rHoiqi38q0BS86NxWiXZaI4all0WJ9uFlydIqUeaVX4=; b=NAaYqJnKpqMGEienkKNSPvtaJMD1C2kv/M3u9JcCxrs4S1cmvS+d6on/zkbXyO4H7h xWNzMUVelxlv1j1b+7SpbV+v/qOZUNJES9hzU1WeOAdS80A5MI/qK46GUPcUsEEkSLXI ebnwXoRcdsvmwv1RMx6nzG/tV4Ju8VRUtORejOZKY06jBWgAy8FEvEVZKyaaB+v+6zFK ndH4Pb8WSuvKdJ1M7/1/3ilt+RWjqqEE4ONfpqYL/Qtbtp1NUexXgksBAKOWV0YoRyP0 exGU03kOOeDdlclfvIxw/2eTw2T1ggPmpw1lipCN/6Lk3TTLkYItzVGc/1YUBG+xmrjw 5h5w== X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H0PPg7fmu60XGU988K5KHYWHXqAM0HmP6l+bAN0iY8C4SUl+utjY4+ChCz+20qVKwQZddyniIY4qAg+Xw== X-Received: by 10.129.40.206 with SMTP id o197mr20616116ywo.353.1490108741758; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 08:05:41 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.37.164.73 with HTTP; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 08:05:41 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20170311102929.f4bca99e253d6560566cbfb7@nifty.ne.jp> References: <20170309203959.1e7e32d20bf7ec06c705d3ba@nifty.ne.jp> <20170310201036.GA18927@calimero.vinschen.de> <20170311102929.f4bca99e253d6560566cbfb7@nifty.ne.jp> From: Erik Bray Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 15:05:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: fork() fails if it is called recursively from a child thread. To: cygwin@cygwin.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2017-03/txt/msg00223.txt.bz2 On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 2:29 AM, Takashi Yano wrote: > Hello, > > On Fri, 10 Mar 2017 21:10:36 +0100 Corinna Vinschen wrote: >> Thanks for the report and especially the testcase. >> >> It was a tricky problem to debug so it took me a while, but I think >> I got it now. >> >> I uploaded new developer snapshots to https://cygwin.com/snapshots/ >> >> Please give them a try. I'd be also interested if that fixes the iperf >> problem. Can you check? There's always a chance that this uncovers >> another problem hidden under this one... > > I tested the new snapshot, and confirmed the issue was fixed. > The test case as well as iperf 2.0.5 with options -s -D works > without problem. > > At least in my short test, I couldn't find any other hidden > problems. > > Thank you very much! Thanks for this! I found the same bug a few weeks ago but never got around to finding a simple-enough way to reproduce it so I didn't report it yet. But this fixed the test code I did have, and from looking at the description it should be the same bug. Very subtle. Thanks, Erik -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple