From owner-cvs-all  Fri Feb  2 14:18:50 2001
Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org
Received: from earth.backplane.com (earth-nat-cw.backplane.com [208.161.114.67])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 85DA337B4EC; Fri,  2 Feb 2001 14:18:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from dillon@localhost)
	by earth.backplane.com (8.11.1/8.9.3) id f12MIV700601;
	Fri, 2 Feb 2001 14:18:31 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from dillon)
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 14:18:31 -0800 (PST)
From: Matt Dillon <dillon@earth.backplane.com>
Message-Id: <200102022218.f12MIV700601@earth.backplane.com>
To: Maxim Sobolev <sobomax@FreeBSD.ORG>
Cc: dima@unixfreak.org (Dima Dorfman), mi@aldan.algebra.com,
	deischen@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: mdconfig config file (was: cvs commit: src/sys/i386/conf GENERI C)
References:  <200102022129.f12LTa816954@vic.sabbo.net>
Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG


:
:> <snip>
:> 
:>     if ((pid = fork()) == 0) {
:
:Probably vfork() is better here, no?
:
:-Maxim

    My rule for using vfork() is:  Does it improve performance in
    a noticeable way?  The answer, at least for mount_*, is no.  If the
    answer is no, you should simply use a normal fork().

    fork() under FreeBSD is not all that expensive.  vfork() will be faster,
    but unless you are fork/exec'ing a few dozen commands a second you will
    never notice the difference.

						-Matt



To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message