Before we begin
I love Python and try using the latest versions when possible. But this article is about the subprocess module in Python 2.6. Is there a good reason for that? For starters, you can find this comment in Python 3.1's subprocess module:
# XXX Rewrite these to use non-blocking I/O on the # file objects; they are no longer using C stdio!
Then, there is a pending Asynchronous I/O For subprocess. Popen PEP-3145. Last, but not least, a
temporary moratorium (suspension) of all changes to the Python language syntax, semantics, and built-ins for a period of at least two years from the release of Python 3.1
was proposed and accepted in PEP 3003. Yet,
..As the standard library is not directly tied to the language definition it is not covered by this moratorium.
A simple experiment
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
import subprocess proc = subprocess.Popen(['ls', '-l'], cwd='/', stdout=subprocess.PIPE) out, err = proc.communicate() print(out)
This one is really easy: the ls command with the -l switch is executed, the root is set as a current working directory and a pipe is created to get the data written by ls to stdout.
Why use communicate? Why not write the data directly to Popen.stdin and read from Popen.stdout?
The official documentation says:
Use communicate() rather than Popen.stdin.write, Popen.stdout.read or Popen.stderr.read to avoid deadlocks due to any of the other OS pipe buffers filling up and blocking the child process.
Let's try communicate() with a long-term shell process:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
import subprocess proc = subprocess.Popen('bash', cwd='/', stdin=subprocess.PIPE, stdout=subprocess.PIPE, stderr=subprocess.PIPE) out, err = proc.communicate('ls') print(out) out, err = proc.communicate('ls -l')
With successful first communicate() call, you'll receive ValueError: I/O operation on closed file trying communicate the second time.
Would you like to know, why an error is raised? It's time to dive deeper into the code.
You can find the original and complete code of subprocess module in e.g. /usr/lib/python2.6/subprocess.py.
Note the comments!
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36
def communicate(self, input=None): """Interact with process: Send data to stdin. Read data from stdout and stderr, until end-of-file is reached. Wait for process to terminate. The optional input argument should be a string to be sent to the child process, or None, if no data should be sent to the child. communicate() returns a tuple (stdout, stderr).""" # Optimization: If we are only using one pipe, or no pipe at # all, using select() or threads is unnecessary. if [self.stdin, self.stdout, self.stderr].count(None) >= 2: stdout = None stderr = None if self.stdin: if input: self.stdin.write(input) self.stdin.close() elif self.stdout: # This happens in the experiment we ran above stdout = self.stdout.read() # Note, stdout is closed! self.stdout.close() elif self.stderr: stderr = self.stderr.read() self.stderr.close() # Waiting until process terminates! self.wait() return (stdout, stderr) # The most interesting case, two or more pipes opened # Remember, self is an instance of subprocess.Popen class return self._communicate(input)
Python was made to be cross-platform. On the other hand Python is generally used on POSIX-compatible operating systems. Let's skip the if mswindows: part and get to the POSIX methods block:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32
def _communicate(self, input): # there is a historical reason calling this variables "sets" # see select.select() (below) read_set =  write_set =  # returned variables stdout = None stderr = None # the tricky part starts right here if self.stdin: # Flush stdio buffer. This might block (!), if the user has # been writing to .stdin in an uncontrolled fashion. self.stdin.flush() # Data to be sent to the process through the pipe if input: write_set.append(self.stdin) else: self.stdin.close() if self.stdout: read_set.append(self.stdout) stdout =  if self.stderr: read_set.append(self.stderr) stderr =  input_offset = 0 # ...
This part was not hard at all. It'll be a little bit harder in the next block: please read the select.select()``_ documentation if you're not familiar with the ``select() system call.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49
#... # while read_set contains self.stdout # or write_set contains self.stdin while read_set or write_set: try: # man select # .. select() allows a program to monitor multiple file descriptors, # waiting until one or more of the file descriptors become "ready" # for some class of I/O operation (e.g., input possible). # A file descriptor is considered ready if it is possible to perform # the corresponding I/O operation (e.g., read) without blocking rlist, wlist, xlist = select.select(read_set, write_set, ) except select.error, e: # EINTR means "This call did not succeed because it was interrupted. # However, if you try again, it will probably work." # In other words, EINTR is not a fatal error, it just means # you should retry whatever you were attempting. if e.args == errno.EINTR: continue raise if self.stdin in wlist: # When select has indicated that the file is writable, # we can write up to PIPE_BUF bytes without risk # blocking. POSIX defines PIPE_BUF >= 512 chunk = input[input_offset : input_offset + 512] bytes_written = os.write(self.stdin.fileno(), chunk) input_offset += bytes_written if input_offset >= len(input): # stdin is closed! It's not possible communicate(input) any more. self.stdin.close() write_set.remove(self.stdin) # write_set is empty now if self.stdout in rlist: data = os.read(self.stdout.fileno(), 1024) if data == "": self.stdout.close() read_set.remove(self.stdout) stdout.append(data) if self.stderr in rlist: data = os.read(self.stderr.fileno(), 1024) if data == "": self.stderr.close() read_set.remove(self.stderr) stderr.append(data) #...
Note, that os.write() and os.read() functions are being used. This functions are intended for low-level I/O. If the end of the file referred to by file descriptor (e.g. self.stdout.fileno()) has been reached, an empty string is returned (the if data == "": conditions).
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
#... # The while read_set or write_set: loop ends here # All data exchanged. Translate lists into strings. if stdout is not None: stdout = ''.join(stdout) # (stdout) is a list if stderr is not None: stderr = ''.join(stderr) # Translate newlines, if requested. We cannot let the file # object do the translation: It is based on stdio, which is # impossible to combine with select (unless forcing no # buffering). if self.universal_newlines and hasattr(file, 'newlines'): if stdout: stdout = self._translate_newlines(stdout) if stderr: stderr = self._translate_newlines(stderr) self.wait() # wait until process terminates return (stdout, stderr)
If Python was built with the --with-universal-newlines option in configure (the default), the file.newlines read-only attribute exists, and for files opened in universal newline read mode it keeps track of the types of newlines encountered while reading the file. The _translate_newlines() method just replaces the Windows-style (\r\n) and Mac-style (\r) newlines with \n.
The last pieces of the puzzle:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
def wait(self): """Wait for child process to terminate. Returns returncode attribute.""" if self.returncode is None: # Try calling a function os.waitpid(self.pid, 0) # Ignore Interrupted System Call (errno.EINTR) errors pid, sts = _eintr_retry_call(os.waitpid, self.pid, 0) self._handle_exitstatus(sts) return self.returncode