Hi Mark,
On 2025-06-09 16:08:56+0100, Mark Brown wrote:
To allow testing of vfork() support in the arm64 basic-gcs test provide an implementation for nolibc, using the vfork() syscall if one is available and otherwise clone3(). We implement in terms of clone3() since the order of the arguments for clone() varies between architectures.
Thanks for the patch!
Do you want to take this series through your tree?
Signed-off-by: Mark Brown broonie@kernel.org
tools/include/nolibc/sys.h | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 29 insertions(+)
diff --git a/tools/include/nolibc/sys.h b/tools/include/nolibc/sys.h index 9556c69a6ae1..e056da010f64 100644 --- a/tools/include/nolibc/sys.h +++ b/tools/include/nolibc/sys.h @@ -22,6 +22,7 @@ #include <linux/time.h> #include <linux/auxvec.h> #include <linux/fcntl.h> /* for O_* and AT_* */ +#include <linux/sched.h> /* for clone_args */ #include <linux/stat.h> /* for statx() */ #include "errno.h" @@ -340,6 +341,34 @@ pid_t fork(void) return __sysret(sys_fork()); } +#ifndef sys_vfork +static __attribute__((unused)) +pid_t sys_vfork(void) +{ +#ifdef __NR_vfork
- return my_syscall0(__NR_vfork);
+#elif defined(__NR_clone3)
- /*
* clone() could be used but has different argument orders per* architecture.*/- struct clone_args args = {
.flags = CLONE_VM | CLONE_VFORK,.exit_signal = SIGCHLD,- };
- return my_syscall2(__NR_clone3, &args, sizeof(args));
+#else
- return __nolibc_enosys(__func__);
+#endif +} +#endif
+static __attribute__((unused)) +pid_t vfork(void) +{
- return __sysret(sys_vfork());
+}
Could you also add a test to nolibc-test.c? Maybe extend test_fork() with a flag to use either fork() or vfork(). And maybe change the exit() in the test to _exit(); not that it would make a difference for nolibc (yet).
/*
- int fsync(int fd);
-- 2.39.5