From owner-freebsd-current Thu Sep 18 16:32:21 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id QAA17563 for current-outgoing; Thu, 18 Sep 1997 16:32:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from alpo.whistle.com (alpo.whistle.com [207.76.204.38]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA17557; Thu, 18 Sep 1997 16:32:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by alpo.whistle.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id QAA09735; Thu, 18 Sep 1997 16:23:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from current1.whistle.com(207.76.205.22) via SMTP by alpo.whistle.com, id smtpd009733; Thu Sep 18 23:23:32 1997 Message-ID: <3421B7C9.3F54BC7E@whistle.com> Date: Thu, 18 Sep 1997 16:22:49 -0700 From: Julian Elischer Organization: Whistle Communications X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (X11; I; FreeBSD 2.2-CURRENT i386) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dyson@FreeBSD.ORG CC: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FYI: regarding our rfork(2) References: <199709182235.RAA09701@dyson.iquest.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk John S. Dyson wrote: > > I am going to be changing our rfork implementation in the following ways: > > Rename RFMEM to RFSHMEM, implying that we are fully sharing memory. > Also implying that we don't support RFMEM in the same way as other > OSes might. Add an additional argument to rfork(2) to support > specifying a new stack address in the child. This argument is > meaningful only if RFSHMEM is specified. This mod will eliminate > some potential timing windows when the child is running with the > parents stack. It will also eliminate the need for certain > "gymnastics" in code that uses rfork with RFSHMEM. > > I'll be committing the changes tonight, so let me know if anyone > has problems with the concept. well, it makes it incompatible with the rfork in plan 9 What does Linux's clone() call have as arguments..? > > -- > John > dyson@freebsd.org > jdyson@nc.com