From owner-freebsd-hackers  Mon Sep 15 22:13:06 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id WAA27158
          for hackers-outgoing; Mon, 15 Sep 1997 22:13:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dyson.iquest.net (dyson.iquest.net [198.70.144.127])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA27152
          for <freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>; Mon, 15 Sep 1997 22:13:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from root@localhost)
	by dyson.iquest.net (8.8.6/8.8.5) id AAA00456;
	Tue, 16 Sep 1997 00:12:43 -0500 (EST)
From: "John S. Dyson" <toor@dyson.iquest.net>
Message-Id: <199709160512.AAA00456@dyson.iquest.net>
Subject: Re: What is wrong with this snipet?
In-Reply-To: <XFMail.970915213646.Shimon@i-Connect.Net> from Simon Shapiro at "Sep 15, 97 09:36:46 pm"
To: Shimon@i-Connect.Net (Simon Shapiro)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 1997 00:12:43 -0500 (EST)
Cc: thorpej@nas.nasa.gov, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Reply-To: dyson@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL31 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

Simon Shapiro said:
> 
> Hi Jason Thorpe;  On 14-Sep-97 you wrote: 
> >  On Sat, 13 Sep 1997 16:34:42 -0700 (PDT) 
> >   Simon Shapiro <Shimon@i-Connect.Net> wrote:
> >  
> >   > Why would the following segfault on 6 of the 10 iterations?
> >  
> >  In the FreeBSD implementation of RFMEM (which does not match Plan 9's),
> >  the child gets the same stack as the parent.  If you "return" in the
> >  child,
> >  someone's stack gets munched.
> 
> Not exactly useful, I'd say...
>  
It actually is -- you just don't call RFMEM in the same way that you
would call vfork.  It is doing good things at work.

John