Develop Reference

Python : passing values between different processes

I have debugged my code for a while and I found out that bash_shell(message,shell) fails to pass the shell dictionary back to the main process. The dictionary is still blank but when I read (actually, print) shell in bash_shell(), it does have the value. Which means maybe because I passed the value of the variable but not the alias? But I saw other posts in other websites, people do it in that way and it works fine.
And I tried to do threading.Thread() instead of multiprocessing.Process(). The thread can pass the value back with global variables (didn't try the parameter method).
import multiprocessing,subprocess
# doing import stuff and blah blah blah
shell = dict()
shell['sh_out'] = ''
shell['py_out'] = ''
# code.... (in this part I also defined channel, guild, _globals, _locals,bot, etc...)
def bash_shell(msg,shell):
global channel,guild,_globals,_locals
try:
proc = subprocess.Popen(msg.split(" "), stdout=subprocess.PIPE,text=True)
except Exception as e:
shell['sh_out'] = str(e) + '\n$'
return
(out, err) = proc.communicate()
if err:
shell['sh_out'] = '```\n' + str(out) + "\n```\nError: `" + str(err) + "`\n```\n$```"
else:
shell['sh_out'] = '```\n'+ str(out) + "\n$```"
if len(rt) > 1988:
f = open("samples/shoutput.txt","w")
f.write(rt)
f.close()
return
#code.......
# #bot.event
def on_message(message):
#again code......
# if message.channel.name == 'bash':
# p = multiprocessing.Process(target=bash_shell,args=[message,shell])
p = multiprocessing.Process(target=bash_shell,args=['ls -al',shell])
p.start()
p.join(5)
if p.is_alive():
p.kill()
shell['sh_out'] = "Enough fork bomb. Please don't try to hang the bot."
p.join()
if len(shell['sh_out']) > 1998:
# await message.channel.send(file=discord.File(open("samples/shoutput.txt","r"),"output.txt"))
shell['sh_out'] = ''
return
print(shell)
# await message.channel.send(shell['sh_out'])
shell['sh_out'] = ""
return
on_message('a')
(note: if you wonder what I am doing, it's just a bot coded in discord.py. Code has been modified so that it is more understandable and easy to trigger the exception.)
So what did I do wrong? Or are there better ways to do the trick? Why can't it changes the dictionary shell but other people can do so?

You have two possibility:
1 ) Share Memory space between processes
2 ) Use the Manager Object provided by the multiprocessing library
But for the communication between process, you can use a Queue as mentionned in this excellent article :
https://www.geeksforgeeks.org/multiprocessing-python-set-2/amp/

use multiprocessing or threading script python

i want use multiprocessing or threading for this code
and I would like to control the threading example threads = (50)
if i chose 50 theards is opend 50 process
please help me
this code :-
import subprocess
import csv
def ping(hostname):
p = subprocess.Popen(["ping", "-n", "1","-w","1000",hostname], stdout=subprocess.PIPE, stderr=subprocess.PIPE)
pingStatus = 'ok';
for line in p.stdout:
output = line.rstrip().decode('UTF-8')
if (output.endswith('unreachable.')) :
#No route from the local system. Packets sent were never put on the wire.
pingStatus = 'unreacheable'
break
elif (output.startswith('Ping request could not find host')) :
pingStatus = 'host_not_found'
break
if (output.startswith('Request timed out.')) :
#No Echo Reply messages were received within the default time of 1 second.
pingStatus = 'timed_out'
break
#end if
#endFor
return pingStatus
#endDef
def printPingResult(hostname):
statusOfPing = ping(hostname)
if (statusOfPing == 'host_not_found') :
writeToFile('!server-not-found.txt', hostname)
elif (statusOfPing == 'unreacheable') :
writeToFile('!unreachable.txt', hostname)
elif (statusOfPing == 'timed_out') :
writeToFile('!timed_out.txt', hostname)
elif (statusOfPing == 'ok') :
writeToFile('!ok.txt', hostname)
#endIf
#endPing
def writeToFile(filename, data) :
with open(filename, 'a') as output:
output.write(data + '\n')
#endWith
#endDef
'''
servers.txt example
vm8558
host2
server873
google.com
'''
file = open('hosts.txt')
try:
reader = csv.reader(file)
for item in reader:
printPingResult(item[0].strip())
#endFor
finally:
file.close()
#endTry
i want use multiprocessing or threading for this code
and I would like to control the threading example threads = (50)
if i chose 50 theards is opend 50 process

You may want to use pool object from python multiprocessing module.
from https://docs.python.org/2/library/multiprocessing.html
Pool object which offers a convenient means of parallelizing the execution of a function across multiple input values, distributing the input data across processes (data parallelism). The following example demonstrates the common practice of defining such functions in a module so that child processes can successfully import that module.
Here is a simple example that demonstrates multiprocessing for ping calls.
Hope this helps.
EDIT1
**host.txt**
google.com
yahoo.com
microsoft.com
cnn.com
stackoverflow.com
github.com
CODE
from multiprocessing import Pool
import subprocess
def ping(hostname):
return hostname, subprocess.call(['ping', '-c', '3', '-w', '1000', hostname])
if __name__ == '__main__':
HOSTFILE = 'server.txt'
POOLCOUNT = 5
#read host name file and load to list
hostfile = open(HOSTFILE, 'r')
hosts = [line.strip() for line in hostfile.readlines()]
#Create pool
p = Pool(POOLCOUNT)
#multiprocess and map ping function to host list
print(p.map(ping, hosts))
Result
Status 1= sucess, 0 = failure
>>>
[('google.com', 1), ('yahoo.com', 1), ('microsoft.com', 1), ('cnn.com', 1), ('stackoverflow.com', 1), ('github.com', 1)]

Display Popen.communicate() in real time [duplicate]

I have a python subprocess that I'm trying to read output and error streams from. Currently I have it working, but I'm only able to read from stderr after I've finished reading from stdout. Here's what it looks like:
process = subprocess.Popen(command, stdout=subprocess.PIPE, stderr=subprocess.PIPE)
stdout_iterator = iter(process.stdout.readline, b"")
stderr_iterator = iter(process.stderr.readline, b"")
for line in stdout_iterator:
# Do stuff with line
print line
for line in stderr_iterator:
# Do stuff with line
print line
As you can see, the stderr for loop can't start until the stdout loop completes. How can I modify this to be able to read from both in the correct order the lines come in?
To clarify: I still need to be able to tell whether a line came from stdout or stderr because they will be treated differently in my code.

The code in your question may deadlock if the child process produces enough output on stderr (~100KB on my Linux machine).
There is a communicate() method that allows to read from both stdout and stderr separately:
from subprocess import Popen, PIPE
process = Popen(command, stdout=PIPE, stderr=PIPE)
output, err = process.communicate()
If you need to read the streams while the child process is still running then the portable solution is to use threads (not tested):
from subprocess import Popen, PIPE
from threading import Thread
from Queue import Queue # Python 2
def reader(pipe, queue):
try:
with pipe:
for line in iter(pipe.readline, b''):
queue.put((pipe, line))
finally:
queue.put(None)
process = Popen(command, stdout=PIPE, stderr=PIPE, bufsize=1)
q = Queue()
Thread(target=reader, args=[process.stdout, q]).start()
Thread(target=reader, args=[process.stderr, q]).start()
for _ in range(2):
for source, line in iter(q.get, None):
print "%s: %s" % (source, line),
See:
Python: read streaming input from subprocess.communicate()
Non-blocking read on a subprocess.PIPE in python
Python subprocess get children's output to file and terminal?

Here's a solution based on selectors, but one that preserves order, and streams variable-length characters (even single chars).
The trick is to use read1(), instead of read().
import selectors
import subprocess
import sys
p = subprocess.Popen(
["python", "random_out.py"], stdout=subprocess.PIPE, stderr=subprocess.PIPE
)
sel = selectors.DefaultSelector()
sel.register(p.stdout, selectors.EVENT_READ)
sel.register(p.stderr, selectors.EVENT_READ)
while True:
for key, _ in sel.select():
data = key.fileobj.read1().decode()
if not data:
exit()
if key.fileobj is p.stdout:
print(data, end="")
else:
print(data, end="", file=sys.stderr)
If you want a test program, use this.
import sys
from time import sleep
for i in range(10):
print(f" x{i} ", file=sys.stderr, end="")
sleep(0.1)
print(f" y{i} ", end="")
sleep(0.1)

The order in which a process writes data to different pipes is lost after write.
There is no way you can tell if stdout has been written before stderr.
You can try to read data simultaneously from multiple file descriptors in a non-blocking way
as soon as data is available, but this would only minimize the probability that the order is incorrect.
This program should demonstrate this:
#!/usr/bin/env python
# -*- coding: utf-8 -*-
import os
import select
import subprocess
testapps={
'slow': '''
import os
import time
os.write(1, 'aaa')
time.sleep(0.01)
os.write(2, 'bbb')
time.sleep(0.01)
os.write(1, 'ccc')
''',
'fast': '''
import os
os.write(1, 'aaa')
os.write(2, 'bbb')
os.write(1, 'ccc')
''',
'fast2': '''
import os
os.write(1, 'aaa')
os.write(2, 'bbbbbbbbbbbbbbb')
os.write(1, 'ccc')
'''
}
def readfds(fds, maxread):
while True:
fdsin, _, _ = select.select(fds,[],[])
for fd in fdsin:
s = os.read(fd, maxread)
if len(s) == 0:
fds.remove(fd)
continue
yield fd, s
if fds == []:
break
def readfromapp(app, rounds=10, maxread=1024):
f=open('testapp.py', 'w')
f.write(testapps[app])
f.close()
results={}
for i in range(0, rounds):
p = subprocess.Popen(['python', 'testapp.py'], stdout=subprocess.PIPE
, stderr=subprocess.PIPE)
data=''
for (fd, s) in readfds([p.stdout.fileno(), p.stderr.fileno()], maxread):
data = data + s
results[data] = results[data] + 1 if data in results else 1
print 'running %i rounds %s with maxread=%i' % (rounds, app, maxread)
results = sorted(results.items(), key=lambda (k,v): k, reverse=False)
for data, count in results:
print '%03i x %s' % (count, data)
print
print "=> if output is produced slowly this should work as whished"
print " and should return: aaabbbccc"
readfromapp('slow', rounds=100, maxread=1024)
print
print "=> now mostly aaacccbbb is returnd, not as it should be"
readfromapp('fast', rounds=100, maxread=1024)
print
print "=> you could try to read data one by one, and return"
print " e.g. a whole line only when LF is read"
print " (b's should be finished before c's)"
readfromapp('fast', rounds=100, maxread=1)
print
print "=> but even this won't work ..."
readfromapp('fast2', rounds=100, maxread=1)
and outputs something like this:
=> if output is produced slowly this should work as whished
and should return: aaabbbccc
running 100 rounds slow with maxread=1024
100 x aaabbbccc
=> now mostly aaacccbbb is returnd, not as it should be
running 100 rounds fast with maxread=1024
006 x aaabbbccc
094 x aaacccbbb
=> you could try to read data one by one, and return
e.g. a whole line only when LF is read
(b's should be finished before c's)
running 100 rounds fast with maxread=1
003 x aaabbbccc
003 x aababcbcc
094 x abababccc
=> but even this won't work ...
running 100 rounds fast2 with maxread=1
003 x aaabbbbbbbbbbbbbbbccc
001 x aaacbcbcbbbbbbbbbbbbb
008 x aababcbcbcbbbbbbbbbbb
088 x abababcbcbcbbbbbbbbbb

This works for Python3 (3.6):
p = subprocess.Popen(cmd, stdout=subprocess.PIPE,
stderr=subprocess.PIPE, universal_newlines=True)
# Read both stdout and stderr simultaneously
sel = selectors.DefaultSelector()
sel.register(p.stdout, selectors.EVENT_READ)
sel.register(p.stderr, selectors.EVENT_READ)
ok = True
while ok:
for key, val1 in sel.select():
line = key.fileobj.readline()
if not line:
ok = False
break
if key.fileobj is p.stdout:
print(f"STDOUT: {line}", end="")
else:
print(f"STDERR: {line}", end="", file=sys.stderr)

from https://docs.python.org/3/library/subprocess.html#using-the-subprocess-module
If you wish to capture and combine both streams into one, use
stdout=PIPE and stderr=STDOUT instead of capture_output.
so the easiest solution would be:
process = subprocess.Popen(command, stdout=subprocess.PIPE, stderr=subprocess.STDOUT)
stdout_iterator = iter(process.stdout.readline, b"")
for line in stdout_iterator:
# Do stuff with line
print line

I know this question is very old, but this answer may help others who stumble upon this page in researching a solution for a similar situation, so I'm posting it anyway.
I've built a simple python snippet that will merge any number of pipes into a single one. Of course, as stated above, the order cannot be guaranteed, but this is as close as I think you can get in Python.
It spawns a thread for each of the pipes, reads them line by line and puts them into a Queue (which is FIFO). The main thread loops through the queue, yielding each line.
import threading, queue
def merge_pipes(**named_pipes):
r'''
Merges multiple pipes from subprocess.Popen (maybe other sources as well).
The keyword argument keys will be used in the output to identify the source
of the line.
Example:
p = subprocess.Popen(['some', 'call'],
stdin=subprocess.PIPE,
stdout=subprocess.PIPE,
stderr=subprocess.PIPE)
outputs = {'out': log.info, 'err': log.warn}
for name, line in merge_pipes(out=p.stdout, err=p.stderr):
outputs[name](line)
This will output stdout to the info logger, and stderr to the warning logger
'''
# Constants. Could also be placed outside of the method. I just put them here
# so the method is fully self-contained
PIPE_OPENED=1
PIPE_OUTPUT=2
PIPE_CLOSED=3
# Create a queue where the pipes will be read into
output = queue.Queue()
# This method is the run body for the threads that are instatiated below
# This could be easily rewritten to be outside of the merge_pipes method,
# but to make it fully self-contained I put it here
def pipe_reader(name, pipe):
r"""
reads a single pipe into the queue
"""
output.put( ( PIPE_OPENED, name, ) )
try:
for line in iter(pipe.readline,''):
output.put( ( PIPE_OUTPUT, name, line.rstrip(), ) )
finally:
output.put( ( PIPE_CLOSED, name, ) )
# Start a reader for each pipe
for name, pipe in named_pipes.items():
t=threading.Thread(target=pipe_reader, args=(name, pipe, ))
t.daemon = True
t.start()
# Use a counter to determine how many pipes are left open.
# If all are closed, we can return
pipe_count = 0
# Read the queue in order, blocking if there's no data
for data in iter(output.get,''):
code=data[0]
if code == PIPE_OPENED:
pipe_count += 1
elif code == PIPE_CLOSED:
pipe_count -= 1
elif code == PIPE_OUTPUT:
yield data[1:]
if pipe_count == 0:
return

This works for me (on windows):
https://github.com/waszil/subpiper
from subpiper import subpiper
def my_stdout_callback(line: str):
print(f'STDOUT: {line}')
def my_stderr_callback(line: str):
print(f'STDERR: {line}')
my_additional_path_list = [r'c:\important_location']
retcode = subpiper(cmd='echo magic',
stdout_callback=my_stdout_callback,
stderr_callback=my_stderr_callback,
add_path_list=my_additional_path_list)

Run interactive Bash with popen and a dedicated TTY Python

I need to run an interactive Bash instance in a separated process in Python with it's own dedicated TTY (I can't use pexpect).
I used this code snippet I commonly see used in similar programs:
master, slave = pty.openpty()
p = subprocess.Popen(["/bin/bash", "-i"], stdin=slave, stdout=slave, stderr=slave)
os.close(slave)
x = os.read(master, 1026)
print x
subprocess.Popen.kill(p)
os.close(master)
But when I run it I get the following output:
$ ./pty_try.py
bash: cannot set terminal process group (10790): Inappropriate ioctl for device
bash: no job control in this shell
Strace of the run shows some errors:
...
readlink("/usr/bin/python2.7", 0x7ffc8db02510, 4096) = -1 EINVAL (Invalid argument)
...
ioctl(3, SNDCTL_TMR_TIMEBASE or SNDRV_TIMER_IOCTL_NEXT_DEVICE or TCGETS, 0x7ffc8db03590) = -1 ENOTTY (Inappropriate ioctl for device)
...
readlink("./pty_try.py", 0x7ffc8db00610, 4096) = -1 EINVAL (Invalid argument)
The code snippet seems pretty straightforward, is Bash not getting something it needs? what could be the problem here?

This is a solution to run an interactive command in subprocess. It uses pseudo-terminal to make stdout non-blocking(also some command needs a tty device, eg. bash). it uses select to handle input and ouput to the subprocess.
#!/usr/bin/env python
# -*- coding: utf-8 -*-
import os
import sys
import select
import termios
import tty
import pty
from subprocess import Popen
command = 'bash'
# command = 'docker run -it --rm centos /bin/bash'.split()
# save original tty setting then set it to raw mode
old_tty = termios.tcgetattr(sys.stdin)
tty.setraw(sys.stdin.fileno())
# open pseudo-terminal to interact with subprocess
master_fd, slave_fd = pty.openpty()
try:
# use os.setsid() make it run in a new process group, or bash job control will not be enabled
p = Popen(command,
preexec_fn=os.setsid,
stdin=slave_fd,
stdout=slave_fd,
stderr=slave_fd,
universal_newlines=True)
while p.poll() is None:
r, w, e = select.select([sys.stdin, master_fd], [], [])
if sys.stdin in r:
d = os.read(sys.stdin.fileno(), 10240)
os.write(master_fd, d)
elif master_fd in r:
o = os.read(master_fd, 10240)
if o:
os.write(sys.stdout.fileno(), o)
finally:
# restore tty settings back
termios.tcsetattr(sys.stdin, termios.TCSADRAIN, old_tty)

This is the solution that worked for me at the end (as suggested by qarma) :
libc = ctypes.CDLL('libc.so.6')
master, slave = pty.openpty()
p = subprocess.Popen(["/bin/bash", "-i"], preexec_fn=libc.setsid, stdin=slave, stdout=slave, stderr=slave)
os.close(slave)
... do stuff here ...
x = os.read(master, 1026)
print x

Here is a full object oriented solution to do interactive shell commands with TTYs using threads and queues for stdout and stderr IO handling. This took me a while to build from multiple locations but it works perfectly so far on Unix/Linux systems and also as part of a Juniper op script. Thought I would post this here to save others time in trying to build something like this.
import pty
import re
import select
import threading
from datetime import datetime, timedelta
import os
import logging
import subprocess
import time
from queue import Queue, Empty
lib_logger = logging.getLogger("lib")
# Handler function to be run as a thread for pulling pty channels from an interactive shell
def _pty_handler(pty_master, logger, queue, stop):
poller = select.poll()
poller.register(pty_master, select.POLLIN)
while True:
# Stop handler if flagged
if stop():
logger.debug("Disabling pty handler for interactive shell")
break
fd_event = poller.poll(100)
for descriptor, event in fd_event:
# Read data from pipe and send to queue if there is data to read
if event == select.POLLIN:
data = os.read(descriptor, 1).decode("utf-8")
if not data:
break
# logger.debug("Reading in to handler queue: " + data)
queue.put(data)
# Exit handler if stdout is closing
elif event == select.POLLHUP:
logger.debug("Disabling pty handler for interactive shell")
break
# Function for reading outputs from the given queue by draining it and returning the output
def _get_queue_output(queue: Queue) -> str:
value = ""
try:
while True:
value += queue.get_nowait()
except Empty:
return value
# Helper function to create the needed list for popen and print the command run to the logger
def popen_command(command, logger, *args):
popen_list = list()
popen_list.append(command)
command_output = command
for arg in args:
popen_list.append(arg)
command_output += " " + arg
lib_logger.debug("Making Popen call using: " + str(popen_list))
logger.debug("")
logger.debug(command_output)
logger.debug("")
return popen_list
# Class for create an interactive shell and sending commands to it along with logging output to loggers
class InteractiveShell(object):
def __init__(self, command, logger, *args):
self.logger = logger
self.command = command
self.process = None
self.popen_list = popen_command(command, logger, *args)
self.master_stdout = None
self.slave_stdout = None
self.master_stderr = None
self.slave_stderr = None
self.stdout_handler = None
self.stderr_handler = None
self.stdout_queue = None
self.stderr_queue = None
self.stop_handlers = False
# Open interactive shell and setup all threaded IO handlers
def open(self, shell_prompt, timeout=DEVICE_TIMEOUT):
# Create PTYs
self.master_stdout, self.slave_stdout = pty.openpty()
self.master_stderr, self.slave_stderr = pty.openpty()
# Create shell subprocess
self.process = subprocess.Popen(self.popen_list, stdin=self.slave_stdout, stdout=self.slave_stdout,
stderr=self.slave_stderr, bufsize=0, start_new_session=True)
lib_logger.debug("")
lib_logger.debug("Started interactive shell for command " + self.command)
lib_logger.debug("")
# Create thread and queues for handling pty output and start them
self.stdout_queue = Queue()
self.stderr_queue = Queue()
self.stdout_handler = threading.Thread(target=_pty_handler, args=(self.master_stdout,
lib_logger,
self.stdout_queue,
lambda: self.stop_handlers))
self.stderr_handler = threading.Thread(target=_pty_handler, args=(self.master_stderr,
lib_logger,
self.stderr_queue,
lambda: self.stop_handlers))
self.stdout_handler.daemon = True
self.stderr_handler.daemon = True
lib_logger.debug("Enabling stderr handler for interactive shell " + self.command)
self.stderr_handler.start()
lib_logger.debug("Enabling stdout handler for interactive shell " + self.command)
self.stdout_handler.start()
# Wait for shell prompt
lib_logger.debug("Waiting for shell prompt: " + shell_prompt)
return self.wait_for(shell_prompt, timeout)
# Close interactive shell which should also kill all threaded IO handlers
def close(self):
# Wait 5 seconds before closing to let shell handle all input and outputs
time.sleep(5)
# Stop IO handler threads and terminate the process then wait another 5 seconds for cleanup to happen
self.stop_handlers = True
self.process.terminate()
time.sleep(5)
# Check for any additional output from the stdout handler
output = ""
while True:
data = _get_queue_output(self.stdout_queue)
if data != "":
output += data
else:
break
for line in iter(output.splitlines()):
self.logger.debug(line)
# Check for any additional output from the stderr handler
output = ""
while True:
data = _get_queue_output(self.stderr_queue)
if data != "":
output += data
else:
break
for line in iter(output.splitlines()):
self.logger.error(line)
# Cleanup PTYs
os.close(self.master_stdout)
os.close(self.master_stderr)
os.close(self.slave_stdout)
os.close(self.slave_stderr)
lib_logger.debug("Interactive shell command " + self.command + " terminated")
# Run series of commands given as a list of a list of commands and wait_for strings. If no wait_for is needed then
# only provide the command. Return if all the commands completed successfully or not.
# Ex:
# [
# ["ssh jsas#" + vnf_ip, r"jsas#.*:"],
# ["juniper123", r"jsas#.*\$"],
# ["sudo su", r".*jsas:"],
# ["juniper123", r"root#.*#"],
# ["usermod -p 'blah' jsas"]
# ]
def run_commands(self, commands_list):
shell_status = True
for command in commands_list:
shell_status = self.run(command[0])
if shell_status and len(command) == 2:
shell_status = self.wait_for(command[1])
# Break out of running commands if a command failed
if not shell_status:
break
return shell_status
# Run given command and return False if error occurs otherwise return True
def run(self, command, sleep=0):
# Check process to make sure it is still running and if not grab the stderr output
if self.process.poll():
self.logger.error("Interactive shell command " + self.command + " closed with return code: " +
self.process.returncode)
data = _get_queue_output(self.stderr_queue)
if data != "":
self.logger.error("Interactive shell error messages:")
for line in iter(data.splitlines()):
self.logger.error(line)
return False
# Write command to process and check to make sure a newline is in command otherwise add it
if "\n" not in command:
command += "\n"
os.write(self.master_stdout, command.encode("utf-8"))
if sleep:
time.sleep(sleep)
return True
# Wait for specific regex expression in output before continuing return False if wait time expires otherwise return
# True
def wait_for(self, this, timeout=DEVICE_TIMEOUT):
timeout = datetime.now() + timedelta(seconds=timeout)
output = ""
# Keep searching for output until timeout occurs
while timeout > datetime.now():
data = _get_queue_output(self.stdout_queue)
if data != "":
# Add to output line and check for match to regex given and if match then break and send output to
# logger
output += data
lib_logger.debug("Checking for " + this + " in data: ")
for line in iter(output.splitlines()):
lib_logger.debug(line)
if re.search(r"{}\s?$".format(this), output):
break
time.sleep(1)
# Send output to logger
for line in iter(output.splitlines()):
self.logger.debug(line)
# If wait time expired print error message and return False
if timeout < datetime.now():
self.logger.error("Wait time expired when waiting for " + this)
return False
return True

Confusing on subprocess.Popen

This problem makes me confused
I just want to run 1 command on 18 different input file so I've wrote it like
while filenames or running:
while filenames and len(running) < N_CORES:
filename = filenames.pop(0)
print 'Submiting process for %s' % filename
cmd = COMMAND % dict(filename=filename, localdir=localdir)
p = subprocess.Popen(cmd, shell=True)
print 'running:', cmd
running.append((cmd, p))
i = 0
while i < len(running):
(cmd, p) = running[i]
ret = p.poll()
if ret is not None:
rep = open('Crux.report.%d' % (report_number), 'w')
rep.write('Command: %s' % cmd)
print localdir
print 'done!'
report_number += 1
running.remove((cmd, p))
else:
i += 1
time.sleep(1)
But when I've run it after 3 hours all of the process going to Sleep mode.
But if I call the command from terminal manually (for all of the different files), all of them have been Ok.
Any help would be appreciate.

I assume you want to run 18 processes (one process per file) with no more than N_CORES processes in parallel.
The simplest way could be to use multiprocessing.Pool here:
import multiprocessing as mp
import subprocess
def process_file(filename):
try:
return filename, subprocess.call([cmd, filename], cwd=localdir)
except OSError:
return filename, None # failed to start subprocess
if __name__ == "__main__":
pool = mp.Pool()
for result in pool.imap_unordered(process_file, filenames):
# report result here

Whithout knowing what your subprocesses are supposed to do and how long they are supposed to be running it's hard to give an accurate answer here.
Some problems I see with your program:
you check for i < len(running), while incrementing i and removing from running.
Either use a counter or check if the list still contains elements, but don't do both at the same time. This way you will break out of the loop halfway.
you increment i each time a process has not finished, you probably want to increment if a process has finished.