I'm having a strange problem I've encountered as I wrote a script to start my local JBoss instance.
My code looks something like this:
with open("/var/run/jboss/jboss.pid", "wb") as f:
process = subprocess.Popen(["/opt/jboss/bin/standalone.sh", "-b=0.0.0.0"])
f.write(str(process.pid))
try:
process.wait()
except KeyboardInterrupt:
process.kill()
Should be fairly simple to understand, write the PID to a file while its running, once I get a KeyboardInterrupt, kill the child process.
The problem is that JBoss keeps running in the background after I send the kill signal, as it seems that the signal doesn't propagate down to the Java process started by standalone.sh.
I like the idea of using Python to write system management scripts, but there are a lot of weird edge cases like this where if I would have written it in Bash, everything would have just worked™.
How can I kill the entire subprocess tree when I get a KeyboardInterrupt?
You can do this using the psutil library:
import psutil
#..
proc = psutil.Process(process.pid)
for child in proc.children(recursive=True):
child.kill()
proc.kill()
As far as I know the subprocess module does not offer any API function to retrieve the children spawned by subprocesses, nor does the os module.
A better way of killing the processes would probably be the following:
proc = psutil.Process(process.pid)
procs = proc.children(recursive=True)
procs.append(proc)
for proc in procs:
proc.terminate()
gone, alive = psutil.wait_procs(procs, timeout=1)
for p in alive:
p.kill()
This would give a chance to the processes to terminate correctly and when the timeout ends the remaining processes will be killed.
Note that psutil also provides a Popen class that has the same interface of subprocess.Popen plus all the extra functionality of psutil.Process. You may want to simply use that instead of subprocess.Popen. It is also safer because psutil checks that PIDs don't get reused if a process terminates, while subprocess doesn't.
Related
I am using the following code to launch a subprocess :
# Run the program
subprocess_result = subprocess.run(
cmd,
stdout=subprocess.PIPE,
stderr=subprocess.PIPE,
check=False,
timeout=timeout,
cwd=directory,
env=env,
preexec_fn=set_memory_limits,
)
The launched subprocess is also a Python program, with a shebang.
This subprocess may last for longer than the specified timeout.
The subprocess does heavy computations and write results in a file and does not contain any signal handler.
According to the documentation https://docs.python.org/3/library/subprocess.html#subprocess.run, subprocess.run kills a child that timesout :
The timeout argument is passed to Popen.communicate(). If the timeout
expires, the child process will be killed and waited for. The
TimeoutExpired exception will be re-raised after the child process has
terminated.
When my subprocess timesout, I always receive the subprocess.TimeoutExpired exception, but from time to time the subprocess is not killed, hence still consuming resources on my machine.
So my question is, am I doing something wrong here ? If yes, what and if no, why do I have this issue and how can I solve it ?
Note : I am using Python 3.10 on Ubuntu 22_04
The most likely culprit for the behaviour you see is that the subprocess you are spawning is probably using multiprocessing and spawning its own child processes. Killing the parent process does not automatically kill the whole set of descendants. The granchildren are inherited by the init process (i.e. the process with PID 1) and will continue to run.
You can verify from the source code of suprocess.run :
with Popen(*popenargs, **kwargs) as process:
try:
stdout, stderr = process.communicate(input, timeout=timeout)
except TimeoutExpired as exc:
process.kill()
if _mswindows:
# Windows accumulates the output in a single blocking
# read() call run on child threads, with the timeout
# being done in a join() on those threads. communicate()
# _after_ kill() is required to collect that and add it
# to the exception.
exc.stdout, exc.stderr = process.communicate()
else:
# POSIX _communicate already populated the output so
# far into the TimeoutExpired exception.
process.wait()
raise
except: # Including KeyboardInterrupt, communicate handled that.
process.kill()
# We don't call process.wait() as .__exit__ does that for us.
raise
Here you can see at line 550 the timeout is set on the communicate call, if it fires at line 552 the subprocess is .kill()ed. The kill method sends a SIGKILL which immediately kills the subprocess without any cleanup. It's a signal that cannot be caught by the subprocess, so it's not possible that the child is somehow ignoring it.
The TimeoutException is then re-raised at line 564, so if your parent process sees this exception the subprocess is already dead.
This however says nothing of granchildren processes. Those will continue to run as children of PID 1.
I don't see any way in which you can customize how subprocess.run handles subprocess termination. For example, if it used SIGTERM instead of SIGKILL you could modify your child process or write a wrapper process that will catch the signal and properly kill all its descendants. But SIGKILL doesn't give you this luxury.
So I believe that for your use case you cannot use the subprocess.run facade but you should use Popen directly. You can look at the subprocess.run implementation and take just the things that you need, maybe dropping support for platforms you don't use.
Note: There are extremely rare situations in which the subprocesses won't die immediately on SIGKILL. I believe the only situation in which this happens is if the subprocess is performing a very long system call or other kernel operation, which might not be interrupted immediately. If the operation is in deadlock this might prevent the process from terminating forever. However I don't think that this is your case, since you did not mention that the process is stuck doing nothing, but from what you said the process simply seems to continue running.
I have a python script that is responsible for verifying the existence of a process with its respective name, I am using the pip module pgrep, the problem is that it does not allow me to kill the processes with the kill module of pip or with the of os.kill because there are several processes that I want to kill and these are saved in list, for example
pid = [2222, 4444, 6666]
How could you kill those processes at once? since the above modules don't give me results.
You would loop over processes using a for loop. Ideally you should send a SIGTERM before resorting to SIGKILL, because it can allow processes to exit more gracefully.
import time
import os
import signal
# send all the processes a SIGTERM
for p in pid:
os.kill(p, signal.SIGTERM)
# give them a short time to do any cleanup
time.sleep(2)
# in case still exist - send them a SIGKILL to definitively remove them
# if they are already exited, just ignore the error and carry on
for p in pid:
try:
os.kill(p, signal.SIGKILL)
except ProcessLookupError:
pass
Try this it may work
processes = {'pro1', 'pro2', 'pro3'}
for proc in psutil.process_iter():
if proc.name() in processes:
proc.kill()
For more information you can refer here
I am running some shell scripts with the subprocess module in python. If the shell scripts is running to long, I like to kill the subprocess. I thought it will be enough if I am passing the timeout=30 to my run(..) statement.
Here is the code:
try:
result=run(['utilities/shell_scripts/{0} {1} {2}'.format(
self.language_conf[key][1], self.proc_dir, config.main_file)],
shell=True,
check=True,
stdout=PIPE,
stderr=PIPE,
universal_newlines=True,
timeout=30,
bufsize=100)
except TimeoutExpired as timeout:
I have tested this call with some shell scripts that runs 120s. I expected the subprocess to be killed after 30s, but in fact the process is finishing the 120s script and than raises the Timeout Exception. Now the Question how can I kill the subprocess by timeout?
The documentation explicitly states that the process should be killed:
from the docs for subprocess.run:
"The timeout argument is passed to Popen.communicate(). If the timeout expires, the child process will be killed and waited for. The TimeoutExpired exception will be re-raised after the child process has terminated."
But in your case you're using shell=True, and I've seen issues like that before, because the blocking process is a child of the shell process.
I don't think you need shell=True if you decompose your arguments properly and your scripts have the proper shebang. You could try this:
result=run(
[os.path.join('utilities/shell_scripts',self.language_conf[key][1]), self.proc_dir, config.main_file], # don't compose argument line yourself
shell=False, # no shell wrapper
check=True,
stdout=PIPE,
stderr=PIPE,
universal_newlines=True,
timeout=30,
bufsize=100)
note that I can reproduce this issue very easily on Windows (using Popen, but it's the same thing):
import subprocess,time
p=subprocess.Popen("notepad",shell=True)
time.sleep(1)
p.kill()
=> notepad stays open, probably because it manages to detach from the parent shell process.
import subprocess,time
p=subprocess.Popen("notepad",shell=False)
time.sleep(1)
p.kill()
=> notepad closes after 1 second
Funnily enough, if you remove time.sleep(), kill() works even with shell=True probably because it successfully kills the shell which is launching notepad.
I'm not saying you have exactly the same issue, I'm just demonstrating that shell=True is evil for many reasons, and not being able to kill/timeout the process is one more reason.
However, if you need shell=True for a reason, you can use psutil to kill all the children in the end. In that case, it's better to use Popen so you get the process id directly:
import subprocess,time,psutil
parent=subprocess.Popen("notepad",shell=True)
for _ in range(30): # 30 seconds
if parent.poll() is not None: # process just ended
break
time.sleep(1)
else:
# the for loop ended without break: timeout
parent = psutil.Process(parent.pid)
for child in parent.children(recursive=True): # or parent.children() for recursive=False
child.kill()
parent.kill()
(source: how to kill process and child processes from python?)
that example kills the notepad instance as well.
I'm new to python, so here's what I'm looking to get done.
I would like to use python to manage some of my gameservers and start/stop them. For this I would like to run every gameserver in a own process.
What's the best way to create processes using python, so these processes can continue even if the main application is stopped?
To start a server I only need to execute shell code.
How can I get access after stopping my main application and restarting it to these processes?
I'm not sure if I understand the question completely, but maybe something like this?
Run process:
import subprocess
subprocess.Popen(['/path/gameserver']) #keeps running
And in another script you can use 'ps -A' to find the pid and kill (or restart) it:
import subprocess, signal
p = subprocess.Popen(['ps', '-A'], stdout=subprocess.PIPE)
out, err = p.communicate()
for line in out.splitlines():
if 'gameserver' in line:
pid = int(line.split(None, 1)[0])
os.kill(pid, signal.SIGKILL)
Check the subprocess module. There is a function called call. See here.
You may need to set the process to not be a daemon process.
The child process is started with
subprocess.Popen(arg)
Is there a way to ensure it is killed when parent terminates abnormally? I need this to work both on Windows and Linux. I am aware of this solution for Linux.
Edit:
the requirement of starting a child process with subprocess.Popen(arg) can be relaxed, if a solution exists using a different method of starting a process.
Heh, I was just researching this myself yesterday! Assuming you can't alter the child program:
On Linux, prctl(PR_SET_PDEATHSIG, ...) is probably the only reliable choice. (If it's absolutely necessary that the child process be killed, then you might want to set the death signal to SIGKILL instead of SIGTERM; the code you linked to uses SIGTERM, but the child does have the option of ignoring SIGTERM if it wants to.)
On Windows, the most reliable options is to use a Job object. The idea is that you create a "Job" (a kind of container for processes), then you place the child process into the Job, and you set the magic option that says "when no-one holds a 'handle' for this Job, then kill the processes that are in it". By default, the only 'handle' to the job is the one that your parent process holds, and when the parent process dies, the OS will go through and close all its handles, and then notice that this means there are no open handles for the Job. So then it kills the child, as requested. (If you have multiple child processes, you can assign them all to the same job.) This answer has sample code for doing this, using the win32api module. That code uses CreateProcess to launch the child, instead of subprocess.Popen. The reason is that they need to get a "process handle" for the spawned child, and CreateProcess returns this by default. If you'd rather use subprocess.Popen, then here's an (untested) copy of the code from that answer, that uses subprocess.Popen and OpenProcess instead of CreateProcess:
import subprocess
import win32api
import win32con
import win32job
hJob = win32job.CreateJobObject(None, "")
extended_info = win32job.QueryInformationJobObject(hJob, win32job.JobObjectExtendedLimitInformation)
extended_info['BasicLimitInformation']['LimitFlags'] = win32job.JOB_OBJECT_LIMIT_KILL_ON_JOB_CLOSE
win32job.SetInformationJobObject(hJob, win32job.JobObjectExtendedLimitInformation, extended_info)
child = subprocess.Popen(...)
# Convert process id to process handle:
perms = win32con.PROCESS_TERMINATE | win32con.PROCESS_SET_QUOTA
hProcess = win32api.OpenProcess(perms, False, child.pid)
win32job.AssignProcessToJobObject(hJob, hProcess)
Technically, there's a tiny race condition here in case the child dies in between the Popen and OpenProcess calls, you can decide whether you want to worry about that.
One downside to using a job object is that when running on Vista or Win7, if your program is launched from the Windows shell (i.e., by clicking on an icon), then there will probably already be a job object assigned and trying to create a new job object will fail. Win8 fixes this (by allowing job objects to be nested), or if your program is run from the command line then it should be fine.
If you can modify the child (e.g., like when using multiprocessing), then probably the best option is to somehow pass the parent's PID to the child (e.g. as a command line argument, or in the args= argument to multiprocessing.Process), and then:
On POSIX: Spawn a thread in the child that just calls os.getppid() occasionally, and if the return value ever stops matching the pid passed in from the parent, then call os._exit(). (This approach is portable to all Unixes, including OS X, while the prctl trick is Linux-specific.)
On Windows: Spawn a thread in the child that uses OpenProcess and os.waitpid. Example using ctypes:
from ctypes import WinDLL, WinError
from ctypes.wintypes import DWORD, BOOL, HANDLE
# Magic value from http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms684880.aspx
SYNCHRONIZE = 0x00100000
kernel32 = WinDLL("kernel32.dll")
kernel32.OpenProcess.argtypes = (DWORD, BOOL, DWORD)
kernel32.OpenProcess.restype = HANDLE
parent_handle = kernel32.OpenProcess(SYNCHRONIZE, False, parent_pid)
# Block until parent exits
os.waitpid(parent_handle, 0)
os._exit(0)
This avoids any of the possible issues with job objects that I mentioned.
If you want to be really, really sure, then you can combine all these solutions.
Hope that helps!
The Popen object offers the terminate and kill methods.
https://docs.python.org/2/library/subprocess.html#subprocess.Popen.terminate
These send the SIGTERM and SIGKILL signals for you.
You can do something akin to the below:
from subprocess import Popen
p = None
try:
p = Popen(arg)
# some code here
except Exception as ex:
print 'Parent program has exited with the below error:\n{0}'.format(ex)
if p:
p.terminate()
UPDATE:
You are correct--the above code will not protect against hard-crashing or someone killing your process. In that case you can try wrapping the child process in a class and employ a polling model to watch the parent process.
Be aware psutil is non-standard.
import os
import psutil
from multiprocessing import Process
from time import sleep
class MyProcessAbstraction(object):
def __init__(self, parent_pid, command):
"""
#type parent_pid: int
#type command: str
"""
self._child = None
self._cmd = command
self._parent = psutil.Process(pid=parent_pid)
def run_child(self):
"""
Start a child process by running self._cmd.
Wait until the parent process (self._parent) has died, then kill the
child.
"""
print '---- Running command: "%s" ----' % self._cmd
self._child = psutil.Popen(self._cmd)
try:
while self._parent.status == psutil.STATUS_RUNNING:
sleep(1)
except psutil.NoSuchProcess:
pass
finally:
print '---- Terminating child PID %s ----' % self._child.pid
self._child.terminate()
if __name__ == "__main__":
parent = os.getpid()
child = MyProcessAbstraction(parent, 'ping -t localhost')
child_proc = Process(target=child.run_child)
child_proc.daemon = True
child_proc.start()
print '---- Try killing PID: %s ----' % parent
while True:
sleep(1)
In this example I run 'ping -t localhost' b/c that will run forever. If you kill the parent process, the child process (the ping command) will also be killed.
Since, from what I can tell, the PR_SET_PDEATHSIG solution can result in a deadlock when any threads are running in the parent process, I didn't want to use that and figured out another way. I created a separate auto-terminate process that detects when its parent process is done and kills the other subprocess that is its target.
To accomplish this, you need to pip install psutil, and then write code similar to the following:
def start_auto_cleanup_subprocess(target_pid):
cleanup_script = f"""
import os
import psutil
import signal
from time import sleep
try:
# Block until stdin is closed which means the parent process
# has terminated.
input()
except Exception:
# Should be an EOFError, but if any other exception happens,
# assume we should respond in the same way.
pass
if not psutil.pid_exists({target_pid}):
# Target process has already exited, so nothing to do.
exit()
os.kill({target_pid}, signal.SIGTERM)
for count in range(10):
if not psutil.pid_exists({target_pid}):
# Target process no longer running.
exit()
sleep(1)
os.kill({target_pid}, signal.SIGKILL)
# Don't bother waiting to see if this works since if it doesn't,
# there is nothing else we can do.
"""
return Popen(
[
sys.executable, # Python executable
'-c', cleanup_script
],
stdin=subprocess.PIPE
)
This is similar to https://stackoverflow.com/a/23436111/396373 that I had failed to notice, but I think the way that I came up with is easier for me to use because the process that is the target of cleanup is created directly by the parent. Also note that it is not necessary to poll the status of the parent, though it is still necessary to use psutil and to poll the status of the target subprocess during the termination sequence if you want to try, as in this example, to terminate, monitor, and then kill if terminate didn't work expeditiously.
Hook exit of your process using SetConsoleCtrlHandler, and kill subprocess. I think I do a bit of a overkill there, but it works :)
import psutil, os
def kill_proc_tree(pid, including_parent=True):
parent = psutil.Process(pid)
children = parent.children(recursive=True)
for child in children:
child.kill()
gone, still_alive = psutil.wait_procs(children, timeout=5)
if including_parent:
parent.kill()
parent.wait(5)
def func(x):
print("killed")
if anotherproc:
kill_proc_tree(anotherproc.pid)
kill_proc_tree(os.getpid())
import win32api,shlex
win32api.SetConsoleCtrlHandler(func, True)
PROCESSTORUN="your process"
anotherproc=None
cmdline=f"/c start /wait \"{PROCESSTORUN}\" "
anotherproc=subprocess.Popen(executable='C:\\Windows\\system32\\cmd.EXE', args=shlex.split(cmdline,posix="false"))
...
run program
...
Took kill_proc_tree from:
subprocess: deleting child processes in Windows