Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Maybe this whole thing is overly complicated? We could also elect to just trust JPY_PARENT_PID directly - the only problem is if it's a stale environment variable from somewhere.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks for merging!
My updated thoughts on this comment here is that it's good that we check if JPY_PARENT_PID is the actual parent before using it. It's actually possible (is it common?) to have situations like
papermill -> bash -> ipykernelor with similar intermediate processes, where JPY_PARENT_PID will point to papermill but the ipykernel ppid will be bash.A kernel provisioner could cause such situations (I'm guilty of that..)