Mail Archives: cygwin/2008/09/28/12:28:27
On Sun, Sep 28, 2008 at 05:49:30PM +0200, V??clav Haisman wrote:
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Hash: SHA256
>
>Christopher Faylor wrote, On 28.9.2008 17:25:
>> On Sun, Sep 28, 2008 at 09:32:39AM +0200, V??clav Haisman wrote:
>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>> Hash: SHA256
>>>
>>> Hirokazu Yamamoto wrote, On 28.9.2008 4:16:
>>>> # I've post mail, but it didn't show up in
>>>> http://www.nabble.com/Cygwin-f12165.html.
>>>> # Maybe it was not good to attach a file. So try again...
>>>>
>>>> I'm not familiar with pthread & fork, but I think following code should not
>>>> crash. Is this expected behavior?
>>>>
>>>> #include <stdio.h>
>>>> #include <stdlib.h>
>>>> #include <pthread.h>
>>>> #include <assert.h>
>>>>
>>>> void *thread_func(void* args)
>>>> {
>>>> int ret;
>>>> pid_t pid;
>>>> pthread_t thread;
>>>>
>>>> puts("thread_func");
>>>>
>>>> pid = fork();
>>>>
>>>> assert(pid != (pid_t)-1);
>>>>
>>>> if (pid != 0) /* parent process */
>>>> {
>>>> int status;
>>>>
>>>> printf("parent process (child pid = %d)\n", pid);
>>>>
>>>> waitpid(pid, &status, 0);
>>>>
>>>> puts("parent process end");
>>>> }
>>>> else /* child process */
>>>> {
>>>> puts("child process"); /* crash here */
>>> I think this is not allowed in here. You can only do async-signal-safe
>>> stuff in the child. IO is AFAIK not in that category. Basically, the
>>> only thing you can safely do in the child process is to call exec().
>>
>> I don't see any reason why this shouldn't be allowed. You should
>> be able to do anything you want in a child process.
>I do not think that is true. As per
><http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/functions/fork.html>,
>RATIONALE, the penultimate paragraph, it is basically undefined behaviour.
I wrote the current version of cygwin's fork.
cgf
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
- Raw text -