From owner-freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Jul 27 11:10:03 2012
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-bugs@hub.freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 868AD106564A
	for <freebsd-bugs@hub.freebsd.org>;
	Fri, 27 Jul 2012 11:10:03 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org
	[IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECE218FC15
	for <freebsd-bugs@hub.freebsd.org>;
	Fri, 27 Jul 2012 11:10:02 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q6RBA2cj030843
	for <freebsd-bugs@freefall.freebsd.org>; Fri, 27 Jul 2012 11:10:02 GMT
	(envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org)
Received: (from gnats@localhost)
	by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.5/8.14.5/Submit) id q6RBA2Kj030842;
	Fri, 27 Jul 2012 11:10:02 GMT (envelope-from gnats)
Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2012 11:10:02 GMT
Message-Id: <201207271110.q6RBA2Kj030842@freefall.freebsd.org>
To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org
From: Bruce Evans <brde@optusnet.com.au>
Cc: 
Subject: Re: kern/170203: [kern] piped dd's don't behave sanely when dealing
 with a fifo
X-BeenThere: freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Bruce Evans <brde@optusnet.com.au>
List-Id: Bug reports <freebsd-bugs.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-bugs>,
	<mailto:freebsd-bugs-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-bugs>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-bugs-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-bugs>,
	<mailto:freebsd-bugs-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2012 11:10:03 -0000

The following reply was made to PR kern/170203; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Bruce Evans <brde@optusnet.com.au>
To: davidxu@FreeBSD.org
Cc: Bruce Evans <brde@optusnet.com.au>, Garrett Cooper <yanegomi@gmail.com>,
        freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: kern/170203: [kern] piped dd's don't behave sanely when dealing
 with a fifo
Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2012 21:08:13 +1000 (EST)

 On Fri, 27 Jul 2012, David Xu wrote:
 
 > On 2012/7/27 10:07, Bruce Evans wrote:
 >> 
 >> I think it's working almost as expected.  Large blocks give non-atomic
 >> I/O, so the reader sees small blocks, then EOF when it gets ahead of
 >> the writer.  This always happens without SMP.
 >> 
 >> Not is a bug (debugged below).  There is no SIGPIPE at the start of
 >> write() because there is a reader then, and no SIGPIPE for the next
 >> write() because there is no next write() -- the current one doesn't
 >> notice when the reader goes away.
 >> 
 > After fixed dd to not open fifo output file in O_RDWR mode, I still found the
 > writer is blocked there even the reader is already exited.
 
 I'm not sure that dd's open is a bug.  It must be intentional to use
 O_RDWR for some cases.
 
 POSIX (old 2001 draft) doesn't say anything about dd's open mode.
 
 > I think this is definitely a bug. if reader is exited, the writer should be 
 > aborted too,
 > but I found it still be blocked in state "pipedwt", obviously, the code in
 > /sys/fs/fifo_vnops.c wants to wake up the writer when the reader is closing 
 > the fifo,
 > but it failed, because the bit flag PIPE_WANTW is forgotten to be set by 
 > writer,
 > so it skips executing wakeup(), and then the writer has no chance to find EOF 
 > bit flag
 > is set.
 
 Does this affect nameless pipes too?  The old implementation presumably
 doesn't have this bug.
 
 Bruce