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

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. The idea was to allow MMUless systems a decent means of starting other processes, without requiring the full generality of fork(). It's really not a terribly useful facility when one has, and is used to, fork/exec.

On 12/19/2011 07:04 PM, Thor Lancelot Simon wrote:
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 02:43:08AM +0000, Christos Zoulas wrote:

You realize that currently vfork() does not suspend all the threads
in a threaded program, making it difficult to use...

I didn't.  That's kind of nifty, but I agree it's not exactly easy to
put to constructive use.

So the point of this is to avoid fork() in threaded programs, then?
That's not the rationale I remember seeing in the past -- I thought it
was supposed to improve performance in the general case.


Bill O. Gallmeister

Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index