On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 10:59 PM Thomas Koenig <tkoe...@netcologne.de> wrote: > > Hi Janne, > > > fork() semantics can be problematic. Most unix style OS'es have > > posix_spawn which can be used to replace fork + exec in many cases. > > For more information see > > e.g. > > https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/uploads/prod/2019/04/fork-hotos19.pdf > > > > This replaces the one use of fork in libgfortran with posix_spawn. > > Do I understand the patch correctly that we would no longer use fork() > if posix_spawn is not available? I think we should leave that in as > a fallback option.
Yes. But there is already a fallback in case posix_spawn (or previously, fork) is not available, namely falling back to synchronous behavior. Since this is anyway somewhat of a corner case (namely, with wait=.false.), and posix_spawn is supported on all (well, at least Linux, macOS, *BSD, cygwin, Solarix, AIX) remotely modern unix type systems, a further fallback to fork() is IMHO not warranted. -- Janne Blomqvist
