Re: RFC: import of posix_spawn GSoC results

[yamt%mwd.biglobe.ne.jp@localhost (YAMAMOTO Takashi)]

hi,

> On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 04:07:45AM +0000, YAMAMOTO Takashi wrote:
>> my understanding:
>> there is no need to stop other threads as far as posix_spawn is concerned.
>> so there is no big performace problems with a vfork-based implementation.
>> because our current implementation of vfork suspends the calling threads
>> only, it can be used to implement posix_spawn as it is.  a vfork'ed child
>> should carefully avoid touching memory shared with other threads, but it's
>> doable and not too complex.
> 
> Which is exactly why vfork usage is not safe. The child has to know all
> interfaces that are possible shared, which can often happen behind your
> back in libc.

in general, yes.  but what the child for posix_spawn would need to do is
very limited and seems manageable to me.

YAMAMOTO Takashi

> 
> Joerg