20

Can you help me, why I get sometimes (50:50):

webkit_server.NoX11Error: Cannot connect to X. You can try running with xvfb-run.

When I start the script in parallel as:

xvfb-run -a python script.py

You can reproduce this yourself like so:

for ((i=0; i<10; i++)); do
  xvfb-run -a xterm &
done

Of the 10 instances of xterm this starts, 9 of them will typically fail, exiting with the message Xvfb failed to start.

Charles Duffy
  • 280,126
  • 43
  • 390
  • 441
user3236315
  • 211
  • 2
  • 5
  • 1
    What in particular have you tried? We wouldn't want to suggest what you know won't work. – Wai Ha Lee May 19 '15 at 18:13
  • that said, you say "parallely" -- meaning you're starting a number of instances at the same time? I could see there being a race condition in port allocation. – Charles Duffy May 19 '15 at 19:26
  • 2
    Try passing a unique `--server-num` argument to each instance of `xvfb-run`, rather than relying on `-a` to handle potential races correctly. – Charles Duffy May 19 '15 at 19:27
  • @CharlesDuffy My mistake, I am sorry. Thank you for you attention. – Konrad Krakowiak May 19 '15 at 20:58
  • Could you be explicit about which version of xvfb-run is installed? The code given in https://github.com/revnode/xvfb-run/blob/master/xvfb-run -- three years old, which supposedly corresponds to the 1.0 release -- is **definitely** prone to race conditions, and unsafe when multiple copies are started at precisely the same time. – Charles Duffy May 19 '15 at 21:14
  • 1
    I've tried to improve the question -- it now shows how folks can reproduce the problem themselves, and no longer requires a `script.py` which isn't shown. – Charles Duffy May 19 '15 at 21:37

2 Answers2

39

Looking at xvfb-run 1.0, it operates as follows:

# Find a free server number by looking at .X*-lock files in /tmp.
find_free_servernum() {
    # Sadly, the "local" keyword is not POSIX.  Leave the next line commented in
    # the hope Debian Policy eventually changes to allow it in /bin/sh scripts
    # anyway.
    #local i

    i=$SERVERNUM
    while [ -f /tmp/.X$i-lock ]; do
        i=$(($i + 1))
    done
    echo $i
}

This is very bad practice: If two copies of find_free_servernum run at the same time, neither will be aware of the other, so they both can decide that the same number is available, even though only one of them will be able to use it.

So, to fix this, let's write our own code to find a free display number, instead of assuming that xvfb-run -a will work reliably:

#!/bin/bash

# allow settings to be updated via environment
: "${xvfb_lockdir:=$HOME/.xvfb-locks}"
: "${xvfb_display_min:=99}"
: "${xvfb_display_max:=599}"

# assuming only one user will use this, let's put the locks in our own home directory
# avoids vulnerability to symlink attacks.
mkdir -p -- "$xvfb_lockdir" || exit

i=$xvfb_display_min     # minimum display number
while (( i < xvfb_display_max )); do
  if [ -f "/tmp/.X$i-lock" ]; then                # still avoid an obvious open display
    (( ++i )); continue
  fi
  exec 5>"$xvfb_lockdir/$i" || continue           # open a lockfile
  if flock -x -n 5; then                          # try to lock it
    exec xvfb-run --server-num="$i" "$@" || exit  # if locked, run xvfb-run
  fi
  (( i++ ))
done

If you save this script as xvfb-run-safe, you can then invoke:

xvfb-run-safe python script.py

...and not worry about race conditions so long as no other users on your system are also running xvfb.

This can be tested like so:

for ((i=0; i<10; i++)); do xvfb-wrap-safe xchat & done

...in which case all 10 instances correctly start up and run in the background, as opposed to:

for ((i=0; i<10; i++)); do xvfb-run -a xchat & done

...where, depending on your system's timing, nine out of ten will (typically) fail.

Charles Duffy
  • 280,126
  • 43
  • 390
  • 441
0

This questions was asked in 2015.

In my version of xvfb (2:1.20.13-1ubuntu1~20.04.2), this problem has been fixed.

It looks at /tmp/.X*-lock to find an available port, and then runs Xvfb. If Xvfb fails to start, it finds a new port and retries, up to 10 times.

Paul Draper
  • 78,542
  • 46
  • 206
  • 285