From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B1FAF691F2
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 11 Feb 2021 17:18:00 +0100 (CET)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id A562B1EA54
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 11 Feb 2021 17:17:30 +0100 (CET)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com
 [212.186.127.180])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS id 1F1BD1EA45
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 11 Feb 2021 17:17:29 +0100 (CET)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
 by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id D827446246
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 11 Feb 2021 17:17:28 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <06bf6db0-1eea-1e6d-cd3f-29bc1325f7f6@proxmox.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2021 17:17:27 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:86.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/86.0
Content-Language: en-US
To: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>,
 Stefan Reiter <s.reiter@proxmox.com>
References: <20210209152407.5871-1-s.reiter@proxmox.com>
From: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <20210209152407.5871-1-s.reiter@proxmox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL -0.061 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
 KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment
 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED        -2.3 Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/,
 medium trust
 SPF_HELO_NONE           0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
 SPF_PASS               -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record
Subject: [pve-devel] applied: [PATCH qemu-server] qmeventd: explicitly
 close() pidfds
X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel.lists.proxmox.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pve-devel>, 
 <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Help: <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel>, 
 <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2021 16:18:00 -0000

On 09.02.21 16:24, Stefan Reiter wrote:
> In most circumstances a pidfd gets closed automatically once the child
> dies, and that *should* be guaranteed by us calling SIGKILL - however,
> it seems that sometimes that doesn't happen, leading to leaked file
> descriptors[0].
> 
> Also add a small note to verbose mode showing when the late-cleanup
> actually happens, helped during debug.
> 
> [0] https://forum.proxmox.com/threads/cannot-shutdown-vm.83911/
> 
> Signed-off-by: Stefan Reiter <s.reiter@proxmox.com>
> ---
> 
> I'm puzzled by this, and I'm not entirely sure this is the full fix, but it does
> seem like a good idea to close the fds explicitly anyway.
> 
>  qmeventd/qmeventd.c | 2 ++
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> 
>

applied, thanks!