Historically, from UNIX v7, the process system has detected orphanity of processes by checking a process' parent id. As I say, historically, the init(8) system process is a special process by only one reason: It cannot die. It cannot die because the kernel algorithm to deal with assigning a new parent process id, depends on this fact. when a process executes its exit(2) call (by means of a process system call or by external task as sending it a signal or the like) the kernel reassigns all children of this process the id of the init process as their parent process id. This leads to the most easy test, and most portable way of knowing if a process has got orphan. Just check the result of the getppid(2) system call and if it is the process id of the init(2) process then the process got orphan before the system call.

这种方法会产生两个问题:

first, we have the possibility of changing the init process to any user process, so How can we assure that the init process will always be parent of all orphan processes? Well, in the exit system call code there's a explicit check to see if the process executing the call is the init process (the process with pid equal to 1) and if that's the case, the kernel panics (It should not be able anymore to maintain the process hierarchy) so it is not permitted for the init process to do an exit(2) call. second, there's a race condition in the basic test exposed above. Init process' id is assumed historically to be 1, but that's not warranted by the POSIX approach, that states (as exposed in other response) that only a system's process id is reserved for that purpose. Almost no posix implementation does this, and you can assume in original unix derived systems that having 1 as response of getppid(2) system call is enough to assume the process is orphan. Another way to check is to make a getppid(2) just after the fork and compare that value with the result of a new call. This simply doesn't work in all cases, as both call are not atomic together, and the parent process can die after the fork(2) and before the first getppid(2) system call. The processparent id only changes once, when its parent does anexit(2)call, so this should be enough to check if thegetppid(2)result changed between calls to see that parent process has exit. This test is not valid for the actual children of the init process, because they are always children ofinit(8)`, but you can assume safely these processes as having no parent either (except when you substitute in a system the init process)

以防它与任何人相关，当我从c++派生子进程中的JVM实例时，我可以让JVM实例在父进程完成后正确终止的唯一方法是执行以下操作。如果这不是最好的方法，希望有人能在评论中提供反馈。

1)在通过execv启动Java应用程序之前，在fork子进程上调用prctl(PR_SET_PDEATHSIG, SIGHUP)

2)在Java应用程序中添加一个shutdown钩子，轮询直到其父PID等于1，然后执行一个硬的Runtime.getRuntime().halt(0)。轮询是通过启动运行ps命令的单独shell来完成的(参见:如何在Linux上的Java或JRuby中找到我的PID ?)

130118年编辑:

这似乎不是一个可靠的解决方案。我仍然在努力理解发生的事情的细微差别，但在屏幕/SSH会话中运行这些应用程序时，有时仍然会遇到孤立的JVM进程。

Instead of polling for the PPID in the Java app, I simply had the shutdown hook perform cleanup followed by a hard halt as above. Then I made sure to invoke waitpid in the C++ parent app on the spawned child process when it was time to terminate everything. This seems to be a more robust solution, as the child process ensures that it terminates, while the parent uses existing references to make sure that its children terminate. Compare this to the previous solution which had the parent process terminate whenever it pleased, and had the children try to figure out if they had been orphaned before terminating.

在POSIX中，exit()， _exit()和_exit()函数被定义为:

如果该进程是控制进程，则SIGHUP信号应发送给控制终端的前台进程组中属于呼叫进程的每个进程。

因此，如果您安排父进程作为其进程组的控制进程，那么当父进程退出时，子进程应该得到一个SIGHUP信号。我不确定当父节点崩溃时是否会发生这种情况，但我认为确实会发生。当然，对于非崩溃的情况，它应该可以正常工作。

请注意，您可能必须阅读大量的小字——包括基本定义(Definitions)部分，以及exit()和setsid()和setpgrp()的系统服务信息——才能了解完整的情况。(我也是!)

为了完整起见。在macOS上你可以使用kqueue:

void noteProcDeath(
    CFFileDescriptorRef fdref, 
    CFOptionFlags callBackTypes, 
    void* info) 
{
    // LOG_DEBUG(@"noteProcDeath... ");

    struct kevent kev;
    int fd = CFFileDescriptorGetNativeDescriptor(fdref);
    kevent(fd, NULL, 0, &kev, 1, NULL);
    // take action on death of process here
    unsigned int dead_pid = (unsigned int)kev.ident;

    CFFileDescriptorInvalidate(fdref);
    CFRelease(fdref); // the CFFileDescriptorRef is no longer of any use in this example

    int our_pid = getpid();
    // when our parent dies we die as well.. 
    LOG_INFO(@"exit! parent process (pid %u) died. no need for us (pid %i) to stick around", dead_pid, our_pid);
    exit(EXIT_SUCCESS);
}


void suicide_if_we_become_a_zombie(int parent_pid) {
    // int parent_pid = getppid();
    // int our_pid = getpid();
    // LOG_ERROR(@"suicide_if_we_become_a_zombie(). parent process (pid %u) that we monitor. our pid %i", parent_pid, our_pid);

    int fd = kqueue();
    struct kevent kev;
    EV_SET(&kev, parent_pid, EVFILT_PROC, EV_ADD|EV_ENABLE, NOTE_EXIT, 0, NULL);
    kevent(fd, &kev, 1, NULL, 0, NULL);
    CFFileDescriptorRef fdref = CFFileDescriptorCreate(kCFAllocatorDefault, fd, true, noteProcDeath, NULL);
    CFFileDescriptorEnableCallBacks(fdref, kCFFileDescriptorReadCallBack);
    CFRunLoopSourceRef source = CFFileDescriptorCreateRunLoopSource(kCFAllocatorDefault, fdref, 0);
    CFRunLoopAddSource(CFRunLoopGetMain(), source, kCFRunLoopDefaultMode);
    CFRelease(source);
}

在Linux下，你可以在子进程中安装父进程死亡信号，例如:

#include <sys/prctl.h> // prctl(), PR_SET_PDEATHSIG
#include <signal.h> // signals
#include <unistd.h> // fork()
#include <stdio.h>  // perror()

// ...

pid_t ppid_before_fork = getpid();
pid_t pid = fork();
if (pid == -1) { perror(0); exit(1); }
if (pid) {
    ; // continue parent execution
} else {
    int r = prctl(PR_SET_PDEATHSIG, SIGTERM);
    if (r == -1) { perror(0); exit(1); }
    // test in case the original parent exited just
    // before the prctl() call
    if (getppid() != ppid_before_fork)
        exit(1);
    // continue child execution ...

请注意，在fork之前存储父进程id，并在prctl()之后在子进程中测试它，消除了prctl()和调用子进程的退出之间的竞争条件。

还要注意，子进程的父进程死亡信号在新创建的子进程中被清除。它不受execve()的影响。

如果我们确定负责收养所有孤儿的系统进程PID为1，这个测试就可以简化:

pid_t pid = fork();
if (pid == -1) { perror(0); exit(1); }
if (pid) {
    ; // continue parent execution
} else {
    int r = prctl(PR_SET_PDEATHSIG, SIGTERM);
    if (r == -1) { perror(0); exit(1); }
    // test in case the original parent exited just
    // before the prctl() call
    if (getppid() == 1)
        exit(1);
    // continue child execution ...

但是，依赖于系统进程的初始化和PID 1是不可移植的。posix . 1的授权- 2008指定:

调用进程的所有现有子进程和僵尸进程的父进程ID应设置为实现定义的系统进程的进程ID。也就是说，这些进程应该由一个特殊的系统进程继承。

传统上，采用所有孤儿进程的系统进程是PID 1，即init -它是所有进程的祖先。

在像Linux或FreeBSD这样的现代系统上，另一个进程可能具有这个角色。例如，在Linux上，一个进程可以调用prctl(PR_SET_CHILD_SUBREAPER, 1)来将自己建立为继承其任何后代的所有孤儿的系统进程(参见Fedora 25上的一个例子)。

我正在尝试解决同样的问题，但由于我的程序必须运行在OS X上，所以只运行linux的解决方案对我不起作用。

我得到了与本页其他人相同的结论——当父母去世时，没有一种与posix兼容的方式来通知孩子。所以我想出了次好的办法——让孩子投票。

当父进程(由于任何原因)终止时，子进程将变成进程1。如果子进程只是定期轮询，它可以检查父进程是否为1。如果是，子进程应该退出。

这不是很好，但它可以工作，并且比本文其他地方建议的TCP套接字/锁文件轮询解决方案更容易。