Re: Porting vfork()
Perry Harrington (pedward@sun4.apsoft.com)
Fri, 8 Jan 1999 13:29:07 -0800 (PST)
>
>
>
> On Fri, 8 Jan 1999, Perry Harrington wrote:
> > >
> > > Hmm... I do wonder about what happens to signals while vfork() is blocking
> > > the parent, though. Ick. The parent invoking signal handlers isn't much
> > > better then the child invoking signal handlers. One longjmp(), and
> > > everything gets confused. Temporarily block all signals to the parent but
> > > SIGKILL? Perhaps the only solution. And how does the child cleanly release
> > > the wait_queue in its parent if its parent may have been killed in the
> > > meantime?
> >
> > That's a good question, do you want to temporarily block signals to the parent?
>
> No need to. If you use sleep_on(), the parent won't be getting any signals
> anyway (only sleep_on_interruptible() cares about signals).
That's what I thought I recalled from the Rubini book.
>
> Linus
>
--
Perry Harrington Linux rules all OSes. APSoft ()
email: perry@apsoft.com Think Blue. /\
-
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/