> You write "It's all the same "clone" code in the kernel." > and that may be true, but I'm thinking about the glibc wrappers around them.
I only made that point in response to your contrasts between "a dedicated vfork syscall number" and "a clone call passed CLONE_VFORK | CLONE_VM | SIGCHLD", for which the kernel's semantics are completely identical. > In particular, it seems to me that vfork and clone(CLONE_VM|CLONE_VFORK) > should have similar assembly wrappers around them. But the > vfork code uses SAVE_PID/RESTORE_PID which frobs only the pid, not the tid, > while clone used RESET_PID which frobs both the pid and tid. > It seems to me they should share common infrastructure. That makes sense to me, but I have not looked closely at that logic. Thanks, Roland
