From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17057 invoked by alias); 9 Mar 2004 03:50:58 -0000 Mailing-List: contact libc-hacker-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: libc-hacker-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 17040 invoked from network); 9 Mar 2004 03:50:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO are.twiddle.net) (64.81.246.98) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 9 Mar 2004 03:50:58 -0000 Received: from are.twiddle.net (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by are.twiddle.net (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i293osqb026856; Mon, 8 Mar 2004 19:50:54 -0800 Received: (from rth@localhost) by are.twiddle.net (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i293osEQ026854; Mon, 8 Mar 2004 19:50:54 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: are.twiddle.net: rth set sender to rth@twiddle.net using -f Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2004 03:50:00 -0000 From: Richard Henderson To: Ulrich Drepper Cc: Roland McGrath , libc-hacker@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: getpid/vfork broken Message-ID: <20040309035054.GA26769@twiddle.net> Mail-Followup-To: Ulrich Drepper , Roland McGrath , libc-hacker@sources.redhat.com References: <200403090128.i291SEYg007930@magilla.sf.frob.com> <404D2619.6050005@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <404D2619.6050005@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-SW-Source: 2004-03/txt/msg00029.txt.bz2 On Mon, Mar 08, 2004 at 06:04:09PM -0800, Ulrich Drepper wrote: > No. There is a reason why a vfork syscall was introduced. There aren't > enough registers to use clone and hold the return address. On x86, perhaps. The rest can do so. r~