From owner-freebsd-hackers Wed Aug 19 17:04:48 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA04274 for freebsd-hackers-outgoing; Wed, 19 Aug 1998 17:04:48 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from lestat.nas.nasa.gov (lestat.nas.nasa.gov [129.99.50.29]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id RAA04269 for ; Wed, 19 Aug 1998 17:04:46 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from thorpej@lestat.nas.nasa.gov) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lestat.nas.nasa.gov (8.8.8/8.6.12) with SMTP id QAA02742; Wed, 19 Aug 1998 16:45:59 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199808192345.QAA02742@lestat.nas.nasa.gov> X-Authentication-Warning: lestat.nas.nasa.gov: localhost [127.0.0.1] didn't use HELO protocol To: Mike Smith Cc: "Ron G. Minnich" , hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: sfork()? Reply-To: Jason Thorpe From: Jason Thorpe Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1998 16:45:59 -0700 Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Wed, 19 Aug 1998 16:37:57 +0000 Mike Smith wrote: > Talk to John Dyson and perhaps check the archives to see why our > rfork() behaves like this. If it turns out that our rfork() is wrong, > or bad, or nonstandard, then please submit some diffs to fix it. Basically, the FreeBSD rfork() doens't implement the Plan 9 semantics for RFMEM. The FreeBSD version does full sharing of address space, a'la 3BSD vfork(). In NetBSD, we decided not to adopt rfork() (for now, anyhow) because the Plan 9 API didn't provide the semantics we wanted, and we didn't want to call it rfork() if it wasn't. Ron's rfork() used sharing maps, IIRC, which, while they cause objects to be shared, didn't do what we (NetBSD) wanted for address space sharing. Jason R. Thorpe thorpej@nas.nasa.gov NASA Ames Research Center Home: +1 408 866 1912 NAS: M/S 258-5 Work: +1 650 604 0935 Moffett Field, CA 94035 Pager: +1 650 940 5942 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message