From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com>
Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (gate001.proxmox.com [IPv6:2a0f:8001:1:32::40])
	by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5072F1FF0B3
	for <inbox@lore.proxmox.com>; Thu, 12 Nov 2026 00:05:14 +0100 (CET)
Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
	by gate001.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id A7BC021663;
	Thu, 12 Nov 2026 00:05:11 +0100 (CET)
From: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>
To: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com,
	Lucas Barros <lucasbarros.kam@gmail.com>
Subject: applied: [PATCH common] fix #8288: file: read first line: treat ESRCH
 like a missing file
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2026 00:05:00 +0100
Message-ID: <179443829789.1755154.3896377866586127101.b4-ty@b4>
X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.47.3
In-Reply-To: <20261109142501.23212-1-lucasbarros.kam@gmail.com>
References: <20261109142501.23212-1-lucasbarros.kam@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2
X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1794438306605
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
	AWL                     0.260 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From:
 address
	DMARC_MISSING             0.1 Missing DMARC policy
	KAM_DMARC_STATUS         0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict
 Alignment (newer systems)
	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
Message-ID-Hash: YDUOFNBZK3JXIHCHNW2HXF4EXB3G2JWZ
X-Message-ID-Hash: YDUOFNBZK3JXIHCHNW2HXF4EXB3G2JWZ
X-MailFrom: t.lamprecht@proxmox.com
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; loop;
 banned-address; emergency; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation;
 administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation;
 no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.10
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel.lists.proxmox.com>
List-Help: <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:pve-devel-owner@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Post: <mailto:pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:pve-devel-join@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:pve-devel-leave@lists.proxmox.com>

On Mon, 09 Nov 2026 11:25:01 -0300, Lucas Barros wrote:
> Opening a file below /proc/<pid>/ can fail with ESRCH instead of ENOENT
> when the process exits and gets reaped while the path is looked up, as
> the permission check on the /proc/<pid> directory then no longer finds
> the task. file_read_first_line() only treats ENOENT as "does not
> exist" and dies otherwise.
> 
> This is hit by check_process_running(), which polls /proc/<pid>/stat
> via read_proc_pid_stat(). On boot, startall uses it to wait for the
> start workers of each startup order, outside of any eval, so a worker
> exiting at the wrong moment aborts startall: pve-guests.service fails
> and guests of later startup orders are not started at all.
> 
> [...]

Applied, thanks!

[1/1] fix #8288: file: read first line: treat ESRCH like a missing file
      commit: c9d3e0637b918f3803a98d1fa99838a882f16373