From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1Kh3YY-0004Z6-Dz
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 20 Sep 2008 10:35:30 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1Kh3YU-0004UA-Ps
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 20 Sep 2008 10:35:29 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=58761 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Kh3YU-0004U5-Mo
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 20 Sep 2008 10:35:26 -0400
Received: from rv-out-0708.google.com ([209.85.198.242]:49692)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <balrogg@gmail.com>) id 1Kh3YU-0006dv-7p
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 20 Sep 2008 10:35:26 -0400
Received: by rv-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id f25so738923rvb.22
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Sat, 20 Sep 2008 07:35:25 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <fb249edb0809200735v187ebd80n921e07930016f95c@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2008 16:35:25 +0200
From: "andrzej zaborowski" <balrogg@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] Fix vfork() syscall emulation
In-Reply-To: <20080920142051.GA27083@localhost.localdomain>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <1221750426-14863-1-git-send-email-kirill@shutemov.name>
	<fb249edb0809191956i7c4132fdo1338d04a6d9bc35d@mail.gmail.com>
	<20080920064556.GA24679@localhost.localdomain>
	<fb249edb0809200545x517a6489wbcd234d0b8acd796@mail.gmail.com>
	<20080920131134.GA26850@localhost.localdomain>
	<fb249edb0809200652t3da3c7c5x66838cbadc3d5563@mail.gmail.com>
	<20080920142051.GA27083@localhost.localdomain>
Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Paul Brook <paul@codesourcery.com>

2008/9/20 Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill@shutemov.name>:
> On Sat, Sep 20, 2008 at 03:52:55PM +0200, andrzej zaborowski wrote:
>> 2008/9/20 Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill@shutemov.name>:
>> > So, implementation vfork() using pthread is wrong.
>>
>> Agreed, but implementation of vfork() using fork() is wrong, too.
>
> Why?
>
> man 2 vfork():
>
> BUGS
>       It  is  rather  unfortunate  that Linux revived this specter from the
>       past.  The BSD man page states: "This system call will be  eliminated
>       when  proper system sharing mechanisms are implemented.  Users should
>       not depend on the memory sharing semantics of vfork() as it will,  in
>       that case, be made synonymous to fork(2)."
>
> If any program doesn't work with vfork() implemented using fork(). it's
> program bug.
>
>
>> If
>> we allow a hack, it should be commented, the second thing that needs
>> to be commented is why the value of CLONE_VM flag is ignored if
>> CLONE_VFORK is set -- on Linux it's not ignored.
>
> vfork() is a hack itself. It was introduced when fork() was very expensive.

Ok, perhaps I'm nit picking.  clone(2) specifies some semantics for
CLONE_VFORK regardless of the purpose and this implementation is
nowhere near these semantics.  I'll just add the same comment that
klibc has and push the patch.

Cheers