Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2000 22:55:10 -0700 From: Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net> To: Nigel Roles <ngr@9fs.org> Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: rfork(RFMEM) behaviour Message-ID: <20000716225510.L25571@fw.wintelcom.net> In-Reply-To: <DAENIBHPCGABMPCKEANMIEPMCCAA.ngr@9fs.org>; from ngr@9fs.org on Mon, Jul 17, 2000 at 06:10:01AM %2B0100 References: <DAENIBHPCGABMPCKEANMIEPMCCAA.ngr@9fs.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* Nigel Roles <ngr@9fs.org> [000716 22:11] wrote: > I am getting strange behaviour with rfork(RFMEM) on a ~2 week old > kernel. The following code illustrates it. For all the world, the > stack appears to be shareable after the fork. This is clearly wrong, > since pid was at some point different in parent and child for them > to take the right case. Dig a bit harder on the mailing lists, I bumped into this a couple of years back and was given example code to get around it. Another alternative is the linuxthreads port available in the ports collection. > I'm sure this is down to my stupidity. I'd be grateful for any > feedback. > > Also, I understand that rfork(RFMEM) was not supported in 3.3 under > SMP. My reading of the kernel source suggests that there is no longer > such a limitation. At which version did this change? I'm not sure, but the limitation wasn't in 4.0. -Alfred To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000716225510.L25571>