VFORK(2)                   Linux Programmer's Manual                  VFORK(2)

       vfork - create a child process and block parent

       #include <sys/types.h>
       #include <unistd.h>

       pid_t vfork(void);

   Feature Test Macro Requirements for glibc (see feature_test_macros(7)):

           Since glibc 2.12:
               (_XOPEN_SOURCE >= 500) && ! (_POSIX_C_SOURCE >= 200809L)
                   || /* Since glibc 2.19: */ _DEFAULT_SOURCE
                   || /* Glibc versions <= 2.19: */ _BSD_SOURCE
           Before glibc 2.12:
               _BSD_SOURCE || _XOPEN_SOURCE >= 500

   Standard description
       (From POSIX.1) The vfork() function has the same effect as fork(2),
       except that the behavior is undefined if the process created by vfork()
       either modifies any data other than a variable of type pid_t used to
       store the return value from vfork(), or returns from the function in
       which vfork() was called, or calls any other function before
       successfully calling _exit(2) or one of the exec(3) family of

   Linux description
       vfork(), just like fork(2), creates a child process of the calling
       process.  For details and return value and errors, see fork(2).

       vfork() is a special case of clone(2).  It is used to create new
       processes without copying the page tables of the parent process.  It
       may be useful in performance-sensitive applications where a child is
       created which then immediately issues an execve(2).

       vfork() differs from fork(2) in that the calling thread is suspended
       until the child terminates (either normally, by calling _exit(2), or
       abnormally, after delivery of a fatal signal), or it makes a call to
       execve(2).  Until that point, the child shares all memory with its
       parent, including the stack.  The child must not return from the
       current function or call exit(3) (which would have the effect of
       calling exit handlers established by the parent process and flushing
       the parent's stdio(3) buffers), but may call _exit(2).

       As with fork(2), the child process created by vfork() inherits copies
       of various of the caller's process attributes (e.g., file descriptors,
       signal dispositions, and current working directory); the vfork() call
       differs only in the treatment of the virtual address space, as
       described above.

       Signals sent to the parent arrive after the child releases the parent's
       memory (i.e., after the child terminates or calls execve(2)).

   Historic description
       Under Linux, fork(2) is implemented using copy-on-write pages, so the
       only penalty incurred by fork(2) is the time and memory required to
       duplicate the parent's page tables, and to create a unique task
       structure for the child.  However, in the bad old days a fork(2) would
       require making a complete copy of the caller's data space, often
       needlessly, since usually immediately afterward an exec(3) is done.
       Thus, for greater efficiency, BSD introduced the vfork() system call,
       which did not fully copy the address space of the parent process, but
       borrowed the parent's memory and thread of control until a call to
       execve(2) or an exit occurred.  The parent process was suspended while
       the child was using its resources.  The use of vfork() was tricky: for
       example, not modifying data in the parent process depended on knowing
       which variables were held in a register.

       4.3BSD; POSIX.1-2001 (but marked OBSOLETE).  POSIX.1-2008 removes the
       specification of vfork().

       The requirements put on vfork() by the standards are weaker than those
       put on fork(2), so an implementation where the two are synonymous is
       compliant.  In particular, the programmer cannot rely on the parent
       remaining blocked until the child either terminates or calls execve(2),
       and cannot rely on any specific behavior with respect to shared memory.

       Some consider the semantics of vfork() to be an architectural blemish,
       and the 4.2BSD man page stated: "This system call will be eliminated
       when proper system sharing mechanisms are implemented.  Users should
       not depend on the memory sharing semantics of vfork() as it will, in
       that case, be made synonymous to fork(2)."  However, even though modern
       memory management hardware has decreased the performance difference
       between fork(2) and vfork(), there are various reasons why Linux and
       other systems have retained vfork():

       *  Some performance-critical applications require the small performance
          advantage conferred by vfork().

       *  vfork() can be implemented on systems that lack a memory-management
          unit (MMU), but fork(2) can't be implemented on such systems.
          (POSIX.1-2008 removed vfork() from the standard; the POSIX rationale
          for the posix_spawn(3) function notes that that function, which
          provides functionality equivalent to fork(2)+exec(3), is designed to
          be implementable on systems that lack an MMU.)

       *  On systems where memory is constrained, vfork() avoids the need to
          temporarily commit memory (see the description of
          /proc/sys/vm/overcommit_memory in proc(5)) in order to execute a new
          program.  (This can be especially beneficial where a large parent
          process wishes to execute a small helper program in a child
          process.)  By contrast, using fork(2) in this scenario requires
          either committing an amount of memory equal to the size of the
          parent process (if strict overcommitting is in force) or
          overcommitting memory with the risk that a process is terminated by
          the out-of-memory (OOM) killer.

       The child process should take care not to modify the memory in
       unintended ways, since such changes will be seen by the parent process
       once the child terminates or executes another program.  In this regard,
       signal handlers can be especially problematic: if a signal handler that
       is invoked in the child of vfork() changes memory, those changes may
       result in an inconsistent process state from the perspective of the
       parent process (e.g., memory changes would be visible in the parent,
       but changes to the state of open file descriptors would not be

       When vfork() is called in a multithreaded process, only the calling
       thread is suspended until the child terminates or executes a new
       program.  This means that the child is sharing an address space with
       other running code.  This can be dangerous if another thread in the
       parent process changes credentials (using setuid(2) or similar), since
       there are now two processes with different privilege levels running in
       the same address space.  As an example of the dangers, suppose that a
       multithreaded program running as root creates a child using vfork().
       After the vfork(), a thread in the parent process drops the process to
       an unprivileged user in order to run some untrusted code (e.g., perhaps
       via plug-in opened with dlopen(3)).  In this case, attacks are possible
       where the parent process uses mmap(2) to map in code that will be
       executed by the privileged child process.

   Linux notes
       Fork handlers established using pthread_atfork(3) are not called when a
       multithreaded program employing the NPTL threading library calls
       vfork().  Fork handlers are called in this case in a program using the
       LinuxThreads threading library.  (See pthreads(7) for a description of
       Linux threading libraries.)

       A call to vfork() is equivalent to calling clone(2) with flags
       specified as:


       The vfork() system call appeared in 3.0BSD.  In 4.4BSD it was made
       synonymous to fork(2) but NetBSD introduced it again; see
       ⟨http://www.netbsd.org/Documentation/kernel/vfork.html⟩.  In Linux, it
       has been equivalent to fork(2) until 2.2.0-pre6 or so.  Since
       2.2.0-pre9 (on i386, somewhat later on other architectures) it is an
       independent system call.  Support was added in glibc 2.0.112.

       Details of the signal handling are obscure and differ between systems.
       The BSD man page states: "To avoid a possible deadlock situation,
       processes that are children in the middle of a vfork() are never sent
       SIGTTOU or SIGTTIN signals; rather, output or ioctls are allowed and
       input attempts result in an end-of-file indication."

       clone(2), execve(2), _exit(2), fork(2), unshare(2), wait(2)

       This page is part of release 5.05 of the Linux man-pages project.  A
       description of the project, information about reporting bugs, and the
       latest version of this page, can be found at

Linux                             2017-09-15                          VFORK(2)