[PATCH v3] Add support for Linux/no-mmu with vfork
Dmitry V. Levin
ldv at altlinux.org
Thu Oct 8 00:13:04 UTC 2009
On Wed, Oct 07, 2009 at 07:53:54PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Wednesday 07 October 2009 19:35:02 Dmitry V. Levin wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 07, 2009 at 04:10:53AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > > Systems that lack a MMU cannot use fork() to create the child process.
> > > First we detect if the toolchain has the fork() symbol and if it does
> > > not, we just always use vfork(). If it does, then we try that first. If
> > > it fails due to ENOSYS, we fall back to using vfork().
> > I wonder is there any way to implement this without runtime penalty for
> > systems where fork() never returns ENOSYS?
> the original reason i wrote it that way was that some people configure their
> no-mmu C library in a non-standard way where the fork() symbol does exist but
> only returns an error with ENOSYS. i'm ok if you dont want to support this
> scenario as it doesnt affect me anymore :).
> so it'd be:
> #ifdef HAVE_FORK
> # define strace_vforked false
> # define fork() vfork()
> # define strace_vforked true
> then there wouldnt be any need for the other fork()->strace_fork() changes.
Yes, such variant is better.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the Strace-devel