tech-kern archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: RFC: import of posix_spawn GSoC results
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 05:03:51PM -0500, Mouse wrote:
> > From the annals of the POSIX wars: the rationale for posix_spawn()
> > was to support systems without MMUs, where fork() is expensive, and
> > vfork() impossible.
>
> I would quibble with calling vfork() `impossible'. Perhaps I'm missing
> osmehting, but vfork() seems particularly well-suited to such a system
> to me - the "borrow the VM" semantics strike me as exactly what you
> want when context-switching is expensive. (Though of course the `V' of
> `VM' is a bit of a misnomer in that circumstance.)
>
> In any case, even if I'm wrong, vfork isn't impossible, just, at worst,
> ludicrously expensive. :-)
No, *v*fork is ~easy with no MMU; you just do nothing with the memory
space at all. It's regular fork that's a problem.
--
David A. Holland
dholland%netbsd.org@localhost
Home |
Main Index |
Thread Index |
Old Index