Subject: Re: fork(2) vs. pthread_create()
To: None <tech-userlevel@NetBSD.org>
From: Matthias Scheler <email@example.com>
Date: 06/08/2004 16:34:29
On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 09:56:26AM -0400, Nathan J. Williams wrote:
> firstname.lastname@example.org (Matthias Scheler) writes:
> > I found out today that NetBSD's "libpthread" doesn't like it when an
> > application uses pthread_create(), fork() and finally pthread_create()
> > in the child process.
> "don't do that".
That's what I guessed already. :-)
But the author wasn't too convinced because it works with several
other POSIX threads implementations.
> Notably, none of the pthread_* functions are async-signal-safe.
> In order for this to work, there would have to be a fork handler that
> reset all of libpthread's state to initialization values, and the
> child program would still suffer severe constraints on what program
> mutexes or variables it could use (consider, for example, the state of
> stdio mutexes at the moment of fork()).
There is no such problem in this particular program. It creates a single
thread(*), waits until that thread exits, fork()s and creates more threads
later in the child process.
(*) The whole reason is that it needs lots of stack space for a certain
task. Because threaded applications don't get enough stack space
by default e.g. under FreeBSD the programs creates a thread with
2MB stack space to perform that task.
Matthias Scheler http://scheler.de/~matthias/