Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 22 Jun 2004 13:26:33 -0500
From:      Dan Nelson <dnelson@allantgroup.com>
To:        Chris Stenton <jacs@gnome.co.uk>
Cc:        hackers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: pthread - fork - execv problem
Message-ID:  <20040622182632.GJ86471@dan.emsphone.com>
In-Reply-To: <20040622154056.GA8733@diogenis.ceid.upatras.gr>
References:  <011f01c4578b$923d7b70$4b7ba8c0@gnome.co.uk> <20040622145632.GF86471@dan.emsphone.com> <20040622154056.GA8733@diogenis.ceid.upatras.gr>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In the last episode (Jun 22), Nikos Ntarmos said:
> On Tue, Jun 22, 2004 at 09:56:33AM -0500, Dan Nelson wrote:
> > It may be an application bug.  After a fork both processes are
> > independant.  The child should not be able to affect the parent
> > like this, unless the parent does something like holding a mutex
> > used by all the threads and calling wait().
> 
> ... or the child holding a mutex before the fork(2) syscall. FWIW the
> Linux info for libc and the NetBSD and Solaris man pages mention
> pthread_atfork(3), used to install handlers to take care of such
> cases. FreeBSD seems to not know of any such function, so chances are
> that fork()'ing from inside a posix thread is not supported (?).

It's definitely a possibility.

libpthread in -current does support pthread_atfork, and I have a patch
(below) that adds the same functionality to libc_r and libthr that I
need to send-pr.  Pointy hat to the original committer for breaking ABI
compatibility.

http://dan.allantgroup.com/FreeBSD/

-- 
	Dan Nelson
	dnelson@allantgroup.com



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040622182632.GJ86471>