X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
DKIM-Filter:	OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 4BC043858287
DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cygwin.com;
	s=default; t=1709683729;
	bh=1If6gemVLTspT9rT+2C7vMqYx7wuTeICiLLN1AI2wRE=;
	h=Date:Subject:To:References:In-Reply-To:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe:
	List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To:
	From;
	b=ee2Ct8lxyBcO7OfeSGopu2TJ5KvWUnOg0FWjCCHpe74iJI8S4GFwxNDaFjg2o5GGS
	X7amjnonkU9MVK+wsMsQXaHqw1XpC9VyiKvDQ2X0PT3ZHMQ8mp6FmXPY39avNrAlmv
	+r2MH8tNkPGMypi8Viv6HAPQcgXW/aWlndNDNmBs=
X-Original-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
DMARC-Filter:	OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 3A6463858422
ARC-Filter:	OpenARC Filter v1.0.0 sourceware.org 3A6463858422
ARC-Seal:	i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1709683706; cv=none;
	b=uWs4lrFI1pnm9U1UvArsMAGU6Xb85iGFvEkdCDRl6O09zlPsoYymt48AnjJ6t4omt1HAvcdHjLehySO7o7dJ2Pm3U5kzAEPNk+SjrM8QlN2bHy+mDj5SOLbYjjE05fm0KmA1WzoDC/na9vRLsqUT7eTwljcQGA8ZzQoLEOTwIEI=
ARC-Message-Signature:	i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key;
	t=1709683706; c=relaxed/simple;
	bh=4KN1osYgjIqNPmmFh+2zzzTmtbqMgvDsDNc0toPf774=;
	h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:From;
	b=w9in0zklQwpVliqK7X9lw3CtkZWIbXvrHHHz37UfI4/GbXDoZv3sY/Mg0yKqF8U7I0vixkCsBAK1a8nTsdXrPKQcTzjzCxiwYdVeiJ0FjKQUbD6xJ8ZTaKbHqNGlVa03KhFrRa3O4ew7W2ip3JJ9BsdihKpUA8VwR0b5GrYxETk=
ARC-Authentication-Results:	i=1; server2.sourceware.org
Message-ID:	<4ab591dc-6586-4879-94b1-a3c087af1d4f@maxrnd.com>
Date:	Tue, 5 Mar 2024 16:08:27 -0800
MIME-Version:	1.0
User-Agent:	Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject:	Re: Native posix_spawn() in Cygwin?
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References:	<CAAvCNcCSaRBKYwd8-bU_rRh+m9LajyAVSHi3vH_3iaxwg1GE-Q AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<00ca6f45-aef6-4d0c-9440-8a00b2de487a AT SystematicSW DOT ab DOT ca>
	<CAAvCNcDeYwhpq4Q9ftRgq3oErZNiS=x7DaLr-Lt6gAzG-npGfA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<Zd2ChRq46MUMv0rU AT xps13>
	<CAAvCNcBTRkJuD52dZsPePAG_yK_cBc=Ps4QPeG1BBXdZp5OYdg AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<da003a14-a7ea-46d8-8ded-0f4e49290704 AT maxrnd DOT com>
	<CAAvCNcC6232r+r-a4fme_POrWis_e9yEgMXrLk00E1ptRbS7UA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
In-Reply-To:	<CAAvCNcC6232r+r-a4fme_POrWis_e9yEgMXrLk00E1ptRbS7UA@mail.gmail.com>
X-Spam-Status:	No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, KAM_DMARC_STATUS,
	SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP,
	T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6
X-Spam-Checker-Version:	SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on
	server2.sourceware.org
X-BeenThere:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
X-Mailman-Version:	2.1.30
List-Id:	General Cygwin discussions and problem reports <cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Unsubscribe:	<https://cygwin.com/mailman/options/cygwin>,
	<mailto:cygwin-request AT cygwin DOT com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive:	<https://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-request AT cygwin DOT com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe:	<https://cygwin.com/mailman/listinfo/cygwin>,
	<mailto:cygwin-request AT cygwin DOT com?subject=subscribe>
From:	Mark Geisert via Cygwin <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Reply-To:	Mark Geisert <mark AT maxrnd DOT com>
Errors-To:	cygwin-bounces+archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com
Sender:	"Cygwin" <cygwin-bounces+archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com>

On 3/5/2024 2:42 PM, Dan Shelton via Cygwin wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Mar 2024 at 07:45, Mark Geisert via Cygwin <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com> wrote:
>>
>> On 3/3/2024 7:27 PM, Dan Shelton via Cygwin wrote:
[...]
>>> strace does not help, as I need the Win32 calls BELOW posix_spawn(),
>>> to see the implementation details.
>>
>> Check the source code, then. It's at:
>>       https://cygwin.com/cgit/newlib-cygwin/tree/winsup/cygwin/fork.cc
>>
>> Look at line 587; there's the static function dofork(). Look at the
>> thirty or so lines above that; there's both fork() and
>> __posix_spawn_fork() calling dofork(). So both those user-level
>> functions call into the exact same internals. (BTW __posix_spawn_fork()
>> is called from posix_spawn(); the latter is in newlib and not Cygwin.)
>>
>> You can even see the reason it's done this way by reading the comment.
> 
> Yes, but it is as I feared, Cygwin posix_spawn() does not use Win32
> spawn() at all, and instead uses a rather inefficient vfork()
> solution.

Cygwin's vfork() is just a wrapper around fork(), so yes. But anyway...

> posix_spawn() was added to POSIX so a Win32 implementation can use Win32 spawn()

...now I see what you're getting at:

If posix_spawn() is intended to launch truly unrelated processes, with 
minimal or no coordination with the launching process, why can't it just 
use Windows' CreateProcess? I assume here that's what Win32 spawn() does.

That's an interesting research question for somebody. If somebody steps 
up for that, great, otherwise as usual PTC.
Regards,

..mark


-- 
Problem reports:      https://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                  https://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:        https://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:     https://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

- Raw text -