Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 13:43:53 -0500 (EST) From: "John S. Dyson" <toor@dyson.iquest.net> To: julian@whistle.com (Julian Elischer) Cc: current@freebsd.org, dyson@freebsd.org Subject: Re: rfork() man page wrong? Message-ID: <199706101843.NAA00476@dyson.iquest.net> In-Reply-To: <3395AF81.4487EB71@whistle.com> from Julian Elischer at "Jun 4, 97 11:10:09 am"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> I've checked the man page and the sources.. > > it appears to me that the following section of the man page > is wrong.. > john, if you are reading, can you check if this is what > you understand? > I am reading now (sorry for the delay :-)). > > ------- > RFMEM If set, the kernel will force sharing of the entire ad- > dress space. The child will then inherit all the shared > segments the parent process owns. Other segment types > will be unaffected. Subsequent forks by the parent will > then propagate the shared data and bss between children. > The stack segment is always split. May be set only with > RFPROC. > -------- > The docs for RFMEM are wrong. The kernel will cause total address space sharing, which makes the threads fairly light weight. I am about to make some changes for SMP/kernel based threads to allow for per-cpu data though (but that is in kernel mode only where you see the difference.) You have to manage the stack issues, and I have some example and working code if you want it. (I am using it, and have delivered it for others to use.) I plan to refine the code before committing it, but I'll give you (or anyone) the code if anyone wants it. John
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199706101843.NAA00476>