O_RDWR on named pipes with poll()

问题

I have gone through a variaty of different linux named pipe client/server implementations but most of them use the blocking defaults on reads/writes.

As I am already using poll() to check other flags I though it would be a good idea to check for incoming FIFO data via poll() as well...

After all the research I think that opening the pipe in O_RDWR mode is the only way to prevent an indefinitely number of EOF events on a pipe when no writer has opened it.

This way both ends of the pipe are closed and other clients can open the writable end as well. To respond back I would use separate pipes...

My problem is that although I have found some examples that use the O_RDWR flag the open() manpages describe this flag as being unefined when assigned to a FIFO. (http://linux.die.net/man/3/open)

But how would you use poll() on a pipe without O_RDWR? Do you think "O_RDWR" is a legitimate way to open pipes???

回答1:

First, some preliminaries:

Using O_NONBLOCK and poll() is common practice -- not the other way around. To work successfully, you need to be sure to handle all poll() and read() return states correctly:

• read() return value of 0 means EOF -- the other side has closed its connection. This corresponds (usually, but not on all OSes) to poll() returning a POLLHUP revent. You may want to check for POLLHUP before attempting read(), but it is not absolutely necessary since read() is guaranteed to return 0 after the writing side has closed.
• If you call read() before a writer has connected, and you have O_RDONLY | O_NONBLOCK, you will get EOF (read() returning 0) repeatedly, as you've noticed. However, if you use poll() to wait for a POLLIN event before calling read(), it will wait for the writer to connect, and not produce the EOFs.
• read() return value -1 usually means error. However, if errno == EAGAIN, this simply means there is no more data available right now and you're not blocking, so you can go back to poll() in case other devices need handling. If errno == EINTR, then read() was interrupted before reading any data, and you can either go back to poll() or simply call read() again immediately.

Now, for Linux:

• If you open on the reading side with O_RDONLY, then:
  • The open() will block until there is a corresponding writer open.
  • poll() will give a POLLIN revent when data is ready to be read, or EOF occurs.
  • read() will block until either the requested number of bytes is read, the connection is closed (returns 0), it is interrupted by a signal, or some fatal IO error occurs. This blocking sort of defeats the purpose of using poll(), which is why poll() almost always is used with O_NONBLOCK. You could use an alarm() to wake up out of read() after a timeout, but that's overly complicated.
  • If the writer closes, then the reader will receive a poll() POLLHUP revent and read() will return 0 indefinitely afterwards. At this point, the reader must close its filehandle and reopen it.
    
• If you open on the reading side with O_RDONLY | O_NONBLOCK, then:
  • The open() will not block.
  • poll() will give a POLLIN revent when data is ready to be read, or EOF occurs. poll() will also block until a writer is available, if none is present.
  • After all currently available data is read, read() will either return -1 and set errno == EAGAIN if the connection is still open, or it will return 0 if the connection is closed (EOF) or not yet opened by a writer. When errno == EAGAIN, this means it's time to return to poll(), since the connection is open but there is no more data. When errno == EINTR, read() has read no bytes yet and was interrupted by a signal, so it can be restarted.
  • If the writer closes, then the reader will receive a poll() POLLHUP revent, and read() will return 0 indefinitely afterwards. At this point the reader must close its filehandle and reopen it.
    
• (Linux-specific:) If you open on the reading side with O_RDWR, then:
  • The open() will not block.
  • poll() will give a POLLIN revent when data is ready to be read. However, for named pipes, EOF will not cause POLLIN or POLLHUP revents.
  • read() will block until the requested number of bytes is read, it is interrupted by a signal, or some other fatal IO error occurs. For named pipes, it will not return errno == EAGAIN, nor will it even return 0 on EOF. It will just sit there until the exact number of bytes requested is read, or until it receives a signal (in which case it will return the number of bytes read so far, or return -1 and set errno == EINTR if no bytes were read so far).
  • If the writer closes, the reader will not lose the ability to read the named pipe later if another writer opens the named pipe, but the reader will not receive any notification either.
    
• (Linux-specific:) If you open on the reading side with O_RDWR | O_NONBLOCK, then:
  • The open() will not block.
  • poll() will give a POLLIN revent when data is ready to be read. However, EOF will not cause POLLIN or POLLHUP revents on named pipes.
  • After all currently available data is read, read() will return -1 and set errno == EAGAIN. This is the time to return to poll() to wait for more data, possibly from other streams.
  • If the writer closes, the reader will not lose the ability to read the named pipe later if another writer opens the named pipe. The connection is persistent.

As you are rightly concerned, using O_RDWR with pipes is not standard, POSIX or elsewhere.

However, since this question seems to come up often, the best way on Linux to make "resilient named pipes" which stay alive even when one side closes, and which don't cause POLLHUP revents or return 0 for read(), is to use O_RDWR | O_NONBLOCK.

I see three main ways of handling named pipes on Linux:

1. (Portable.) Without poll(), and with a single pipe:

   • open(pipe, O_RDONLY);
   • Main loop:
     • read() as much data as needed, possibly looping on read() calls.
       • If read() == -1 and errno == EINTR, read() all over again.
       • If read() == 0, the connection is closed, and all data has been received.
         
         

2. (Portable.) With poll(), and with the expectation that pipes, even named ones, are only opened once, and that once they are closed, must be reopened by both reader and writer, setting up a new pipeline:

   • open(pipe, O_RDONLY | O_NONBLOCK);
   • Main loop:
     • poll() for POLLIN events, possibly on multiple pipes at once. (Note: This prevents read() from getting multiple EOFs before a writer has connected.)
     • read() as much data as needed, possibly looping on read() calls.
       • If read() == -1 and errno == EAGAIN, go back to poll() step.
       • If read() == -1 and errno == EINTR, read() all over again.
       • If read() == 0, the connection is closed, and you must terminate, or close and reopen the pipe.
         
         

3. (Non-portable, Linux-specific.) With poll(), and with the expectation that named pipes never terminate, and may be connected and disconnected multiple times:

   • open(pipe, O_RDWR | O_NONBLOCK);
   • Main loop:
     • poll() for POLLIN events, possibly on multiple pipes at once.
     • read() as much data as needed, possibly looping on read() calls.
       • If read() == -1 and errno == EAGAIN, go back to poll() step.
       • If read() == -1 and errno == EINTR, read() all over again.
       • If read() == 0, something is wrong -- it shouldn't happen with O_RDWR on named pipes, but only with O_RDONLY or unnamed pipes; it indicates a closed pipe which must be closed and re-opened. If you mix named and unnamed pipes in the same poll() event-handling loop, this case may still need to be handled.

回答2:

According to open(2) man page, you can pass O_RDONLY|O_NONBLOCK or O_WRONLY|O_NONBLOCK to avoid the open syscall to be blocked (you'll get errno == ENXIO in that case)

As I commented read also the fifo(7) and mkfifo(3) man pages.

来源：https://stackoverflow.com/questions/15055065/o-rdwr-on-named-pipes-with-poll