timeout: Implemention for windows by nikolalukovic · Pull Request #13363 · uutils/coreutils

nikolalukovic · 2026-07-11T16:46:34Z

Attempts to fix #6200

github-actions · 2026-07-11T17:37:06Z

GNU testsuite comparison:

Skip an intermittent issue tests/pr/bounded-memory (fails in this run but passes in the 'main' branch)
Skipping an intermittent issue tests/cut/bounded-memory (passes in this run but fails in the 'main' branch)
Skipping an intermittent issue tests/tail/follow-name (passes in this run but fails in the 'main' branch)
Skipping an intermittent issue tests/tail/tail-n0f (passes in this run but fails in the 'main' branch)
Note: The gnu test tests/cut/cut-huge-range is now being skipped but was previously passing.
Congrats! The gnu test tests/seq/seq-epipe is now passing!

Alonely0 · 2026-07-13T10:27:57Z

how nicely does this play with #13237 ?

nikolalukovic · 2026-07-13T10:29:30Z

how nicely does this play with #13237 ?

nothing in unix world was changed, just shuffled in diff files, when your PR gets merged I'll just rebase

Alonely0 · 2026-07-13T10:31:50Z

Nice then. Quite happy we're getting timeout on Windows land. Let me get this reviewed soon-ish.

codspeed-hq · 2026-07-20T19:51:14Z

Merging this PR will regress 1 benchmark

⚠️

Different runtime environments detected

Some benchmarks with significant performance changes were compared across different runtime environments,
which may affect the accuracy of the results.

Open the report in CodSpeed to investigate

⚡ 8 improved benchmarks
❌ 1 regressed benchmark
✅ 330 untouched benchmarks
🆕 6 new benchmarks
⏩ 46 skipped benchmarks¹

Warning

Please fix the performance issues or acknowledge them on CodSpeed.

Performance Changes

	Mode	Benchmark	`BASE`	`HEAD`	Efficiency
❌	Memory	`seq_large_integers`	52.8 KB	81 KB	-34.74%
⚡	Memory	`timeout_quick_exit`	79 KB	16.2 KB	×4.9
⚡	Simulation	`timeout_quick_exit`	197.6 µs	87.7 µs	×2.3
⚡	Simulation	`seq_large_integers`	2 ms	1.1 ms	+92.83%
⚡	Memory	`sort_general_numeric[200000]`	22.8 MB	16.7 MB	+36.47%
⚡	Simulation	`seq_formatted`	94.7 ms	77 ms	+23%
⚡	Memory	`timeout_enforced`	19.4 KB	16.5 KB	+17.81%
⚡	Simulation	`sort_general_numeric[200000]`	697.5 ms	625.9 ms	+11.43%
⚡	Simulation	`timeout_enforced`	92.8 µs	89.4 µs	+3.77%
🆕	Memory	`timer_expiry_latency[0.001]`	N/A	79.9 KB	N/A
🆕	Memory	`timer_expiry_latency[0.005]`	N/A	17 KB	N/A
🆕	Memory	`timer_expiry_latency[0.02]`	N/A	17 KB	N/A
🆕	Simulation	`timer_expiry_latency[0.001]`	N/A	200.9 µs	N/A
🆕	Simulation	`timer_expiry_latency[0.005]`	N/A	93.1 µs	N/A
🆕	Simulation	`timer_expiry_latency[0.02]`	N/A	92.2 µs	N/A

Tip

Investigate this regression by commenting @codspeedbot fix this regression on this PR, or directly use the CodSpeed MCP with your agent.

_{Comparing nikolalukovic:fix/6200 (abe0c7d) with main (2adc40e)²}

46 benchmarks were skipped, so the baseline results were used instead. If they were deleted from the codebase, click here and archive them to remove them from the performance reports. ↩
No successful run was found on main (bd73c58) during the generation of this report, so 2adc40e was used instead as the comparison base. There might be some changes unrelated to this pull request in this report. ↩

Alonely0

This looks super nice, so lots of thanks for the work! If my other PR lands first, we should be able to enable the benchmarks on *nix as well, and I would hope the rebase/merge isn't too bad; it mostly seems that src/uu/timeout/src/platform/unix.rs would get significantly shrunk (since the logic is moven to uucore), and we'd remove the SIGNALED logic from timeout.rs altogether.

This is a lot of code, so I'll read it with fresh eyes again tomorrow or this week. Also btw, thanks for the new benches!

Alonely0 · 2026-07-20T13:20:19Z

 ]
 # "feat_os_windows" == set of utilities which can be built/run on modern windows platforms
-feat_os_windows = ["feat_Tier1", "stdbuf"]
+feat_os_windows = ["feat_Tier1", "stdbuf", "timeout"]


Not sure if we should instead move timeout to tier 1 if we get Windows support.

cc @sylvestre

Alonely0 · 2026-07-25T15:45:41Z

@nikolalukovic please merge/rebase when you have a moment. I have my review pretty much done, so I'll push the comments once the branch is up-to-date so GitHub doesn't have a stroke.

nikolalukovic · 2026-07-25T15:56:36Z

@nikolalukovic please merge/rebase when you have a moment. I have my review pretty much done, so I'll push the comments once the branch is up-to-date so GitHub doesn't have a stroke.

done

…signal delivery

…mmands

…rl-event latches

Alonely0

Well this is awesome. I've spent the last couple of days testing it on my ARM64 Windows box and it's solid.

Other than my three small comments, this is A-OK from me. Thank you lots!

Alonely0 · 2026-07-26T18:49:56Z

+// table in `uucore::signals`. Kept local so the `process` feature does not
+// depend on the `signals` feature.


Tbh it is perfectly acceptable for process to depend on signal. Last time I checked, it was only in use by timeout, anyway. Even so, given it leads to a cleaner codebase, it's okay; especially considering this way we don't hardcode them twice.

Alonely0 · 2026-07-26T18:51:53Z

+/// terminating a whole group requires a [`Job`].
+pub fn send_signal_to_console_group(pid: u32, signal: usize) -> io::Result<()> {
+    match disposition(signal)? {
+        Disposition::Probe | Disposition::Ignore => Ok(()),


What is the reason we ignore Probe? Is it not supported by Windows? Asking because we do not do the same in the functions below or above.

not supported by windows so just noop-ed

nikolalukovic · 2026-07-27T10:03:43Z

Sign in to view

+    LAST_CTRL_SIGNAL.store(signal, Ordering::Release);
+    if let Some(event) = WAKE_EVENT.get() {
+        let _ = sys::set_event(event.as_handle());
+    }


store then signal order makes sure no harmful race happens, this test shows that https://github.com/uutils/coreutils/pull/13363/changes#diff-adc7cd341abf71518deed5d4bb2273f3b87f56377ee6a4a57bece52be57a32baR557

Alonely0 · 2026-07-27T11:24:52Z

Neat!

nikolalukovic force-pushed the fix/6200 branch from 94c2498 to cde6314 Compare July 11, 2026 16:51

nikolalukovic changed the title ~~timeout: Implement timeout for windows~~ timeout: Implemention for windows Jul 11, 2026

nikolalukovic force-pushed the fix/6200 branch from cde6314 to 048d3f7 Compare July 19, 2026 21:37

Alonely0 suggested changes Jul 20, 2026

View reviewed changes

nikolalukovic requested a review from Alonely0 July 21, 2026 18:33

nikolalukovic force-pushed the fix/6200 branch from 92f6332 to b4dfc89 Compare July 25, 2026 15:56

nikolalukovic added 7 commits July 26, 2026 15:39

uucore: compile signals and process modules on Windows with emulated …

64cf867

…signal delivery

timeout: enable on Windows via platform module split

5d027f3

tests/timeout: run on Windows using the multicall binary for child co…

1f74af1

…mmands

timeout: add cspell ignore entries for new Windows code

a83b9e2

uucore: confine raw Win32 calls to safe wrappers in process::sys

4e10a4c

timeout: enable benchmarks on Windows with a self-exec child command

8f3f9ef

timeout: replace signal globals with per-spawn state and consuming ct…

abe0c7d

…rl-event latches

nikolalukovic force-pushed the fix/6200 branch from b4dfc89 to abe0c7d Compare July 26, 2026 14:28

Alonely0 reviewed Jul 26, 2026

View reviewed changes

sylvestre merged commit 9d0c43a into uutils:main Jul 27, 2026
165 of 166 checks passed

nikolalukovic deleted the fix/6200 branch July 27, 2026 11:29

nikolalukovic mentioned this pull request Jul 27, 2026

kill: implementation for Windows #13604

Open

		// table in `uucore::signals`. Kept local so the `process` feature does not
		// depend on the `signals` feature.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Conversation

nikolalukovic commented Jul 11, 2026

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Jul 11, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Alonely0 commented Jul 13, 2026

Uh oh!

nikolalukovic commented Jul 13, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Alonely0 commented Jul 13, 2026

Uh oh!

codspeed-hq Bot commented Jul 20, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Merging this PR will regress 1 benchmark

Performance Changes

Footnotes

Uh oh!

Alonely0 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Alonely0 Jul 20, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Alonely0 commented Jul 25, 2026

Uh oh!

nikolalukovic commented Jul 25, 2026

Uh oh!

Alonely0 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Alonely0 Jul 26, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Alonely0 Jul 26, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

nikolalukovic Jul 27, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

This comment was marked as resolved.

Uh oh!

nikolalukovic Jul 27, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Alonely0 Jul 27, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Alonely0 commented Jul 27, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

github-actions Bot commented Jul 11, 2026 •

edited

Loading

nikolalukovic commented Jul 13, 2026 •

edited

Loading

codspeed-hq Bot commented Jul 20, 2026 •

edited

Loading