Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.python > #8111 > unrolled thread

How to get return values of a forked process

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.python

Contents

  How to get return values of a forked process Ian <ian.lake@rocketmail.com> - 2011-06-21 11:26 -0700
    Re: How to get return values of a forked process Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2011-06-21 12:54 -0600
      Re: How to get return values of a forked process Ian <ian.lake@rocketmail.com> - 2011-06-21 12:17 -0700
        Re: How to get return values of a forked process Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2011-06-21 13:31 -0600
        Re: How to get return values of a forked process Chris Torek <nospam@torek.net> - 2011-06-21 20:11 +0000

#8111 — How to get return values of a forked process

Hello all,

I need some helped with forking.  In my script, I fork a process.  I
want to get return values from the child process.

This is the script that does the forking:
for x in (mylist):
   pid = os.fork()
   if pid:
         pidList.append(pid)
   else:
        os.execv('/usr/bin/python',('/usr/bin/
python',myForkedScript))

for pid in pidList:
        childPid, status = os.waitpid(pid,0)
        # I think status should be the return value of the forked
process; I would expect status to be a 1 or a 0

myForkedScript has code like this:
if fail:
   os._exit(1)
else:
   os._exit(os.EX_OK)


Is using os._exit() the correct way to get a return value back to the
main process?

I thought the value 'n', passed in os._exit(n) would be the value I
get returned.  In the case of a failure, I get 256 returned rather
than 1.

Thanks for the assistance!
IL

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#8113

On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 12:26 PM, Ian <ian.lake@rocketmail.com> wrote:
> myForkedScript has code like this:
> if fail:
>    os._exit(1)
> else:
>    os._exit(os.EX_OK)
>
> Is using os._exit() the correct way to get a return value back to the
> main process?

sys.exit() is the preferred way.

> I thought the value 'n', passed in os._exit(n) would be the value I
> get returned.  In the case of a failure, I get 256 returned rather
> than 1.

According to the docs, on Unix:

"""
Wait for completion of a child process, and return a tuple containing
its pid and exit status indication: a 16-bit number, whose low byte is
the signal number that killed the process, and whose high byte is the
exit status (if the signal number is zero); the high bit of the low
byte is set if a core file was produced.
"""

And on Windows:

"""
Wait for completion of a process given by process handle pid, and
return a tuple containing pid, and its exit status shifted left by 8
bits (shifting makes cross-platform use of the function easier).
"""

(256 >> 8) == 1

However, I would advise using the subprocess module for this instead
of the os module (which is just low-level wrappers around system
calls).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8115

On Jun 21, 1:54 pm, Ian Kelly <ian.g.ke...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 12:26 PM, Ian <ian.l...@rocketmail.com> wrote:
> > myForkedScript has code like this:
> > if fail:
> >    os._exit(1)
> > else:
> >    os._exit(os.EX_OK)
>
> > Is using os._exit() the correct way to get a return value back to the
> > main process?
>
> sys.exit() is the preferred way.
>
> > I thought the value 'n', passed in os._exit(n) would be the value I
> > get returned.  In the case of a failure, I get 256 returned rather
> > than 1.
>
> According to the docs, on Unix:
>
> """
> Wait for completion of a child process, and return a tuple containing
> its pid and exit status indication: a 16-bit number, whose low byte is
> the signal number that killed the process, and whose high byte is the
> exit status (if the signal number is zero); the high bit of the low
> byte is set if a core file was produced.
> """
>
> And on Windows:
>
> """
> Wait for completion of a process given by process handle pid, and
> return a tuple containing pid, and its exit status shifted left by 8
> bits (shifting makes cross-platform use of the function easier).
> """
>
> (256 >> 8) == 1
>
> However, I would advise using the subprocess module for this instead
> of the os module (which is just low-level wrappers around system
> calls).

Where did you find the Unix docs you pasted in?  I didn't find it in
the man pages.  Thank you.  Based on what you say, I will change my
os._exit() to sys.exit().

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8118

> Where did you find the Unix docs you pasted in?  I didn't find it in
> the man pages.  Thank you.  Based on what you say, I will change my
> os._exit() to sys.exit().

http://docs.python.org/library/os.html#os.wait
http://docs.python.org/library/os.html#os.waitpid

I don't know what man pages you were looking at, but the Unix system
call does work the same way; to extract the exit status in C you're
supposed to use the WEXITSTATUS(status) macro, which is typically
implemented as ((status >> 8) & 0377).  See:

http://linux.die.net/man/2/waitpid

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8123

>> On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 12:26 PM, Ian <ian.l...@rocketmail.com> wrote:
>>> myForkedScript has code like this:
>>> if fail:
>>>     os._exit(1)
>>> else:
>>>    os._exit(os.EX_OK)
>>>
>>> Is using os._exit() the correct way to get a return value back to the
>>> main process?

"The" correct way, no, but it is "a" correct way (and cheaper than
using a pipe to pickle and unpickle failure, the way the subprocess
module does it, for instance).  In any case, you *should* call
os._exit() either directly or indirectly after a successful fork
but a failed exec.

>On Jun 21, 1:54 pm, Ian Kelly <ian.g.ke...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> sys.exit() is the preferred way.

Using sys.exit() after a fork() has other risks (principally,
duplication of pending output when flushing write-mode streams),
which is why os._exit() is provided.

>>> I thought the value 'n', passed in os._exit(n) would be the value I
>>> get returned.  In the case of a failure, I get 256 returned rather
>>> than 1.

>> According to the docs ...
   [snip documentation and description]
>> However, I would advise using the subprocess module for this instead
>> of the os module (which is just low-level wrappers around system
>> calls).

Indeed, subprocess gives you convenience, safety, and platform
independence (at least across POSIX-and-Windows) with a relatively
low cost.  As long as the cost is low enough (and it probably is)
I agree with this.

In article <d195a74d-e173-4168-8812-c03fc02e8da7@fr19g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>
Ian  <ian.lake@rocketmail.com> wrote:
>Where did you find the Unix docs you pasted in?  I didn't find it in
>the man pages.  Thank you.  Based on what you say, I will change my
>os._exit() to sys.exit().

Not sure where Ian Kelly's documentation came from, but note that on
Unix, the "os" module also provides os.WIFSIGNALED, os.WTERMSIG,
os.WIFEXITED, and os.WEXITSTATUS for dissecting the "status"
integer returned from the various os.wait* calls.

Again, if you use the subprocess module, you are insulated from
this sort of detail (which, as always, has both advantages and
disadvantages).
-- 
In-Real-Life: Chris Torek, Wind River Systems
Salt Lake City, UT, USA (40°39.22'N, 111°50.29'W)  +1 801 277 2603
email: gmail (figure it out)      http://web.torek.net/torek/index.html

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.python

csiph-web