[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170615001513.GL1627@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2017 20:15:13 -0400
From: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: more fun with non-Linux Linux ABI
On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 08:29:59AM -0700, Bobby Powers wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 2:50 PM, Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> wrote:
> >> Such an option would most probably result in a pretty small performance
> >> impact on modern (native) Linux.
> >
> > It's actually a pretty large impact; recent (4.x+ IIRC) versions of
> > GNU makes are considerably slower because they dropped use of vfork
> > and switched to fork rather than making it use posix_spawn like it
> > should.
>
> Do you know why they chose not to use posix_spawn?
Probably lack of knowledge, or lack of resources to test a major
change like that. Possibly missing functionality they want to do
between fork and exec, but it seems like they could use posix_spawn
for the cases where they don't need extra functionality and fallback
to fork+exec when they do. You'd have to follow up with the GNU make
project to know for sure.
Rich
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
