[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       busybox
Subject:    Re: [BusyBox] fork / vfork in init.c
From:       Doctor Bill <docbill () gmail ! com>
Date:       2004-10-26 19:31:47
Message-ID: 23bcb870041026123155735e8a () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

I remember OS-9, kept all executable code as read only with a checksum
to detected changes.  There was no copy on write.  With it's
equivalent of fork() the stack would be copied, the same executable
code would still be referenced.  I'm not sure how it handled allocated
memory, it has been too many years, but I suspect it was just copying
the memory pages at the time of the "fork".

> I thought that vfork tended to block until the child process had returned...

Many systems emulate a vfork() that way.  But no, a real vfork() will not block.

                  Bill


_______________________________________________
busybox mailing list
busybox@mail.busybox.net
http://codepoet.org/mailman/listinfo/busybox


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]