On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 7:25 PM Martin Buchholz <marti...@google.com> wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 8:09 AM Roger Riggs <roger.ri...@oracle.com> wrote: > >> Hi Thomas, >> >> A minor concern is the impact of the extra write and read that can cause >> rescheduling >> of the parent and child processes. But that's probably in the noise >> compared to the >> real work of exec. It would raise the complexity quite a bit/too much to >> code a single read >> in the parent that could expect 0/4/8 bytes. >> >> At ProcessImpl_md.c: 708: the "Read failed" is less than informative. >> (Though it is the same as the pre-existing one at 720). >> But I suppose it has never happened. The 'Exec failed' is more specific >> than 'read'. >> And it has probably never been seen. >> > > The call looks like > throwIOException(env, errno, "Read failed"); > and that at least includes an errno, so the resulting exception should be > useful for debugging. But yeah, we can probably do better than "Read > failed". > How about "Failed to communicate with child process?"
