On Mon, 7 Jul 2025, Corinna Vinschen wrote:

> On Jul  7 12:16, Jeremy Drake via Cygwin-patches wrote:
> > On Mon, 7 Jul 2025, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > > All good points.  We should actually see what the Austin Group comes up
> > > with and then we can reconsider.  In the meantime we stick to your current
> > > implementation.  Would you mind to push it on top of main into a new
> > > topic branch, i.e., something like
> > >
> > >   git checkout -b topic/posix_spawn main
> > >
> > > and push it?  If you're not aware of this, the "topic/" prefix is
> > > required to allow force pushing to the branch.  It's some kind of
> > > safety net from the gerrit macros activated for a couple of projects
> > > on sware.
> >
> > Done.
> > https://www.cygwin.com/cgit/newlib-cygwin/log/?h=topic%2Fposix_spawn
> >
> > This also includes the patch I recently sent, because I had done half of
> > that while adding pgroup support.
>
> Looks good.  However, shouldn't the hunk adding InterlockedCompareExchange
> setting the pgid go into its own patch?  That looks more like a bugfix
> to me...

I don't think it's a bugfix - previously, this was where the pgid was
initialized and it was done unconditionally.  Now that I want to set the
pgid in child_info_spawn::worker, this needs to not overwrite that
already-set pgid.  (This does not fix the issue where I see a pgid of 0 in
a spawned process sometimes instead of what it should have inherited from
the parent, which I assume is a race between the child running and the
parent finishing up this initialization).

Reply via email to