Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2000 22:41:29 -0800 From: Jason Evans <jasone@canonware.com> To: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> Cc: Alexander Litvin <archer@lucky.net>, Scott Hess <scott@avantgo.com>, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: rfork() [was: Concept check] Message-ID: <20000111224129.K302@sturm.canonware.com> In-Reply-To: <200001120556.VAA67332@apollo.backplane.com>; from dillon@apollo.backplane.com on Tue, Jan 11, 2000 at 09:56:58PM -0800 References: <200001120534.AAA10170@unknown.nowhere.org> <200001120556.VAA67332@apollo.backplane.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Jan 11, 2000 at 09:56:58PM -0800, Matthew Dillon wrote: > > :> fork1() in the kernel]. rfork(RFMEM) means that the processes share all > :> memory - current AND FUTURE. You could use minherit() before fork() to > :> share current memory, but not future memory. > : > :BTW, concerning rfork(RFMEM). Could somebody explain me, why the > :following simple program is coredumping: > > You cannot call rfork() with RFMEM directly from a C program. You > have to use assembly (has anyone created a native clone() call yet > to do all the hard work?). > > The reason is that rfork(RFMEM) does not give the new process a new > stack, so both the old and new processes wind up on the same original > stack and stomp all over each other. There is an implementation of clone() in the linuxthreads port, written by Richard Seaman. Jason 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?20000111224129.K302>