From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 24070 invoked from network); 16 Nov 2020 18:01:37 -0000 Received: from alyss.skarnet.org (95.142.172.232) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 16 Nov 2020 18:01:37 -0000 Received: (qmail 25644 invoked by uid 89); 16 Nov 2020 18:01:57 -0000 Mailing-List: contact supervision-help@list.skarnet.org; run by ezmlm Sender: Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Received: (qmail 25637 invoked from network); 16 Nov 2020 18:01:57 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=Xj2sD1AkEijTulKonVgyTnX3Ic06UeCtKb9QxWYGbkg=; b=I42938NgyuA01sV1OQ8jDNZBYNZBUYMT8woE0h4EBbnitqa3swEXgHn2eufVU9o9Go fkWoUJFgf3v4sGN/eX088XE8UGb4lIHm2WAlUyh4nJ0kA6Nf0F7y3zj4o60tsrtvTfly 72MlKHueGpLDYM8zC5cMmhAh+YfDrf5Uceu6PcvGhsn1HQC22JKIo8lLIJ1Yg+it5uL+ NARY04SQGbb6vwXcL25vFv6RQtt5FP3wuG1cz+H4prwy69hE0IQI5qhfP4Ry0tsbzk2q lt6yOFxASyv7ejlotl0k/klTH1NJal9b58tMODIxC6HkoUkTmQmeFeZm9x2SzDcbxvZx eFcw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=Xj2sD1AkEijTulKonVgyTnX3Ic06UeCtKb9QxWYGbkg=; b=lZYNssQeHKR4R7xkgccU11ahjIolrWmaNa2i2GXMTjtR/4WxjLKzhGig/0nw4Kcnnd 2dK4pFPfsgPwsqHeYUII8cjPCnDZ2B2pfikJn3gyvLppA5w3eQ0H1iYD3+8MltxyLBTp KbzoZos2UsLW5012lwCSrBLBHBs9bPppRE8yVqSpPafyX0RYfmPX5jG9CTb1kcfgAB2o 5e/kpXD+ik8kGQm9NhGxnpt88i6mUp28jO61bIEbaVfD2t4m1wBxJzd4eRAJ0DrShd4b JtBs2AkjDtalMBk6elHi9ugNGy63nzR0c6LmP0nKv2lb7TdOmF6ri3kPMW8/XmlcAtXU 5+nw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5307dvq7UD6wDg70+y+bHZvR195I9I00AsOhO3qe3+64bULZGmSQ INGa25wqENwdiSsNXQD8rwfInFxJn0WkR4mMuWCwCM+OA3E= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzowJhy0+mI56WYvOjfVK8N4nWYLxFv8OkjBoXxfBJLME+i9H8R8VmiJd1wAt+4BvBNFvQGdoHRBx9nwgZAmnk= X-Received: by 2002:ac2:4645:: with SMTP id s5mr212572lfo.196.1605549689825; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 10:01:29 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Xavier Stonestreet Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 19:01:18 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: s6-permafailon not acting as expected To: supervision@list.skarnet.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Hello, I'm seeing unexpected results with s6-permafailon. I have this line in my finish script: s6-permafailon 120 2 1-255,SIGBUS,SIGSEGV exit 0 If I kill the service twice in a row with s6-svc -t, s6-permafailon triggers a permanent failure with the message: s6-permafailon: info: PERMANENT FAILURE triggered after 2 events involving exit code 0 in the last 120 seconds. The service did die with exit code 0, but s6-permafail is wrong, since exit code 0 is not specified in the filter. s6-svdt reports: 2020-11-16 16:00:17.451308493 exitcode 0 2020-11-16 16:00:28.495276767 exitcode 0 Looking at the source code in s6-permafailon.c, it seems to me that the codes[32] bitarray is not initialized with zeroes before calling bitarray_set(n). But not being intimately familiar with the code I'm probably looking at it incorrectly. And I'm not instrumented nor knowledgeable enough to run a debugger. Could you shed some light on this unexpected behavior and tell me what I'm doing wrong, as the case may be. Great supervision and service management toolbox by the way - I love it! :) Thanks, X. s6 2.9.2.0 skalibs 2.9.3.0 execline 2.6.1.1 built from source, linked with musl libc on Linux