lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1999]   [Jan]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: vfork & co bugfix
From
Date
>>>>> "LT" == Linus Torvalds <torvalds@transmeta.com> writes:

LT> I missed it too, until I started thinking about all the possible
LT> combinations.

>> Question. Why don't we let CLONE_VFORK be a standard clone flag?

LT> Because then we're back to the old problem: before doing a vfork(),
LT> somebody could do a "clone(CLONE_VFORK)" (which would _not_ wait on the
LT> semaphore like a real vfork() would), and now the wrong child can wake up
LT> the parent and mess up the real vfork().

Sorry. I had the implicit assumption that if CLONE_VFORK was a
standard clone flag, do_fork would include the five lines of semaphore
code.

Eric



-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:49    [W:0.056 / U:0.452 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site