Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: vfork & co bugfix | From | (Eric W. Biederman) | Date | 11 Jan 1999 00:59:27 -0600 |
| |
>>>>> "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/
| |