Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2015 21:32:44 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 199557] Hang on sysconf(_SC_OPEN_MAX) Message-ID: <bug-199557-8-rPnfB2acZO@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-199557-8@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-199557-8@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199557 Jilles Tjoelker <jilles@FreeBSD.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |jilles@FreeBSD.org --- Comment #7 from Jilles Tjoelker <jilles@FreeBSD.org> --- There is a proposal for an async-signal safe version of fork() called _Fork(), which does not call atfork handlers, at http://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=62 . This would help if the only problem with calling fork() is that it executes atfork handlers. It still executes a fair bit of code, but no user code. To make _Fork() async-signal safe, the malloc handling would have to be disabled as well, making malloc/free in the child more unsafe (but also interfering less with other threads in the parent). The handling of the lock for sem_open() and sem_close() uses pthread_atfork() and would be disabled as well. This may be useful for this and other situations that want to fork from signal handlers or other strange thread states. I have not found common implementations of _Fork(), though. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-199557-8-rPnfB2acZO>