On 8/29/2019 10:13 AM, Jeff King wrote: > On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 08:58:55AM -0400, Derrick Stolee wrote: > >> However, I do have a theory: the process exits before flushing the >> packet line. Adding this line before exit(1) should fix it: >> >> packet_writer_flush(writer); >> >> I can send this in a v2, but it would be nice if you could test this >> in your environment that already demonstrated the failure. > > I don't think we should need such a call. For one thing, if it were > necessary, that would mean we're not writing out the packet at all. But > your whole problem is that we're writing the message twice, one of which > comes from the packet.
The problem the flush() was trying to solve was the new "Broken pipe" error, which I had assumed was due to a communication race. (Looking at the message more closely now, I see that Szeder was able to repro this broken pipe both with and without my change. I am still unable to repro the broken pipe.) > Second is that this is not "flush the output stream", but "write a flush > packet". The packet_writer_error() function immediately calls write() > without buffering. And no matter where we are in the conversation, a > flush packet would not be necessary, because the error packet we send > would be interpreted immediately by the client as aborting the > connection. This clearly shows that my proposed solution is absolutely wrong. Thanks, -Stolee
