[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

fork v vfork (was Re: Mac OS X: Rebuild Require after Security Update 20

From: Steven Tamm
Subject: fork v vfork (was Re: Mac OS X: Rebuild Require after Security Update 2002-11-21)
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2002 09:45:17 -0800

I reported a bug with my test case. It's not that big a deal, I just wanted to make sure that something was being done about it. It's a fairly nasty bug if it hangs the system. It would also make the compile a little cleaner.

WRT fork vs. vfork; on darwin the figures I've seen show a difference in performance about 100x, and has been getting worse in each release.

What are people's feelings about conditionalizing the three calls to vfork (in process.c, callproc.c, and sysdep.c) so that it could become fork() on platforms that don't have a working VFORK. It would probably use the HAVE_VFORK conditional.


On Tuesday, November 26, 2002, at 09:29  AM, Andrew Choi wrote:

Steven Tamm <address@hidden> writes:

[...]  So I think the problem may be with vfork not correctly cleaning
up after itself if the process goes kablooy.  Andrew, did you report a
radar issue associated with this?

Hi Steven,

No.  The problem and fix were submitted by Nozomu Ando on
emacs-pretest-bug a while ago.  I thought it was acceptable to just use
fork so I left it at that.  I have not received reports of other
problems related to this one.

Would you like me to write a bug report to the darwin lists? Seems like
they know about the problem with vfork but perhaps we can remind them.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]