Ronald G. Minnich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Jan 2000, Alexander Litvin wrote:
> > Matthew Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > :BTW, concerning rfork(RFMEM). Could somebody explain me, why the
> > > :following simple program is coredumping:
> > > You cannot call rfork() with RFMEM directly from a C program.
You
> > > have to use assembly (has anyone created a native clone() call
yet
> > > to do all the hard work?).
>
> OK, I'd like to propose another option to rfork to make it a little more
> usable for mortals. The option is RFSTACK. This will cause rfork to work
> like my original version, in that the stack segment (all memory from
> USERSTACK and up) will be cloned.
>
> This would really make a big improvement in rfork usability.
>
> Comments?
That sounds like an _excellent_ suggestion, for general usage.
OTOH, it probably wouldn't be useful for building threading libraries,
threads couldn't see each other's stacks. A libc version of clone() would
probably be more useful, or perhaps an rfork() option which caused it to
create a new stack segment which both processes would see (not much
different from clone in that case).
Later,
scott
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
