From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D79ABB9C for ; Tue, 22 Nov 2005 16:50:49 +0100 (CET) Received: from pauillac.inria.fr (pauillac.inria.fr [128.93.11.35]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id jAMFomvQ015644 for ; Tue, 22 Nov 2005 16:50:48 +0100 Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id QAA14441 for ; Tue, 22 Nov 2005 16:50:48 +0100 (MET) Received: from einhorn.in-berlin.de (einhorn.in-berlin.de [192.109.42.8]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id jAMFols8006948 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for ; Tue, 22 Nov 2005 16:50:48 +0100 X-Envelope-From: oliver@first.in-berlin.de X-Envelope-To: Received: from first.in-berlin.de (e178003105.adsl.alicedsl.de [85.178.3.105]) (authenticated bits=0) by einhorn.in-berlin.de (8.12.10/8.12.10/Debian-4) with ESMTP id jAMFoj8q028896 for ; Tue, 22 Nov 2005 16:50:46 +0100 Received: by first.in-berlin.de (Postfix, from userid 501) id BC9461A5507; Tue, 22 Nov 2005 16:50:03 +0100 (CET) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 16:50:02 +0100 From: Oliver Bandel To: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Threads & Fork Message-ID: <20051122155002.GB16451@first.in-berlin.de> References: <1132673981.13170.17.camel@starlight> <87wtj07kv8.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87wtj07kv8.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang_at_IN-Berlin_e.V. on 192.109.42.8 X-Miltered: at nez-perce with ID 43833E58.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 43833E57.001 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; oliver:01 bandel:01 oliver:01 in-berlin:01 caml-list:01 threads:01 threads:01 ocaml:01 run-time:01 posix:01 posix:01 api:01 unix-module:01 threading:01 clashing:01 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.3 (2005-04-27) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.1 required=5.0 tests=FORGED_RCVD_HELO autolearn=disabled version=3.0.3 On Tue, Nov 22, 2005 at 04:39:07PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Jonathan Bryant: > > > I'm confused as to why the attached code hangs. My understanding of > > Unix.fork () is that it completely clones the current process, which in > > my understanding, clones the processes's threads as well. Apparently, > > though, that is not the case, because I can't join the thread in both > > the parent and the child. > > I can't speak for the OCaml run-time, but POSIX fork only duplicates > the current thread, so the new process is essentially single-threaded. I doubt that this is true. Unix-fork() copies a complete process. If the original has threads, the copy also have. I don't think that POSIX handles this different to old Unix API. Unix-module should do the same as the C-call of fork(2). Threads are running inside a process, like any other function. So all should be copied completely. But using POSIX-threads and Unix-API can yield to many problems, for example POSIX threading signals and Unix-signals are clashing together and the behaviour can be undefined... Ciao, Oliver