Re: too early, no vfork

[Linus Torvalds <torvalds@transmeta.com>]

On 19 Jan 1999, Ulrich Drepper wrote:
> 
> In fact it is impossible to use clone to write vfork on ix86 without
> using malloc.  The problem is that the syscall needs %eax, %ebx, and
> %ecx.  But we have two values to save: %ebx and the return address.
> But there is only %edx available.  The only possible user-level
> implementation would have to allocate some memory outside the stack,
> store the two values and keep the pointer in %edx.  But this is of
> course unacceptable.
> 
> This means wither these kernel people change back to having a syscall
> or we live with fork().

Why can't you just make vfork() an inline function?

		Linus