Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 20:38:58 -0500
From: Kurt Wall <kwall@kurtwerks.com>
To: =?iso-8859-1?B?R+Fib3IgTOlu4XJ0?= <lgb@lgb.hu>
Cc: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: OT: fork(): parent or child should run first?
Message-ID: <20060112013858.GB6178@kurtwerks.com>
Mail-Followup-To: =?iso-8859-1?B?R+Fib3IgTOlu4XJ0?= <lgb@lgb.hu>,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <20060111123745.GB30219@lgb.hu> <1136983910.2929.39.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <20060111130255.GC30219@lgb.hu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <20060111130255.GC30219@lgb.hu>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 855
Lines: 20

On Wed, Jan 11, 2006 at 02:02:55PM +0100, G?bor L?n?rt took 0 lines to write:
> Hello,
> 
> Ok, you're absolutly right here. My problem is to find some solution and not
> to change the behaviour of fork() of course :) It's quite annoying to
> introduce some kind of IPC between parent and childs just for transferring a
> single pid_t ;-) Using exit status would be great (I would transfer "n")

But IPC, especially shared memory, would be great for this if you can
set up the shmid ahead of time. It would certainly be fast.

Kurt
-- 
The study of non-linear physics is like the study of non-elephant
biology.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/