lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Nov]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: RFC: implement daemon() in the kernel
Hi,

Mark Rustad schrieb:

> There is a better way. Simply implement fork(). It can be done even
> without an MMU. People think it is impossible, but that is only because
> they don't consider the possibility of copying memory back and forth on
> task switch. It sounds horrible, but in the vast majority of cases,
> either the parent or child either exits or does an exec pretty quickly,
> so in reality it doesn't cost much. The benefits are many: being able to
> use real shells such as bash and thereby being able to use real shell
> scripts.

This imposes quite a significant overhead for the common case (in which
the application has specifically requested that the parent process be
terminated after the child process is fork()ed off). Even if the cost of
transferring memory contents was cheap (which it isn't), you'd annoy the
memory management subsystem unless you did a lot of weird tricks to
avoid allocating from a large block.

> You do have to look out for any applications that fork and do not either
> exit or exec, but that is so much better than having to modify so many
> things just to get them to run.

Well, in fact just having a libc that does not define a symbol for
"fork" and then going to the places the linker mentions as having
undefined references is a pretty easy way. Mind you, in 90% of cases you
can replace them by a vfork() and be done.

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

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2006-11-20 18:45    [W:0.051 / U:6.068 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site