Angus Dorbie (dorbie++at++sgi.com)
Thu, 18 Mar 1999 12:23:27 -0800
This is the correct behaviour. All that the other processes need is the
address returned by the allocations and they can read & write. The
allocations are made from a shared arena.
Cheers,Angus.
Acosta, Mark W wrote:
>
> I'm seeing some unexpected behavior with my Performer app and shared memory.
> Maybe someone here can enlighten me.
>
> In my application, I occasionally allocate chunks of shared memory (c api,
> no Performer) and load some data into them. I also need to be able to access
> this shared memory in the cull and draw phase of the application. If I'm
> running in multiprocess mode, my assumption was that I would have to attach
> to the shared memory segments in all app and cull processes since they were
> created after Performer forks everything off. Well, a long time ago when I
> originally did this, I could swear that this was the case. However, recently
> while I was rewriting some stuff, I found that if I create shared memory in
> the app process, that the cull and draw processes could access it without
> explicitly attaching to it. This doesn't seem right to me. A forked process
> will inherit attached shared memory segments from the parent but I wouldn't
> expect the children to inherit any shared memory segments created after the
> fork. I've tried this under IRIX 6.5 and 6.4 on an Onyx2 and several
> Octanes. Can anyone confirm that this is the correct behavior?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mark Acosta
> Texaco
> acostmw++at++texaco.com <mailto:acostmw++at++texaco.com>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> List Archives, FAQ, FTP: http://www.sgi.com/software/performer/
> Submissions: info-performer++at++sgi.com
> Admin. requests: info-performer-request++at++sgi.com
-- "Only the mediocre are always at their best." -- Jean GiraudouxFor advanced 3D graphics Performer + OpenGL based examples and tutors: http://www.dorbie.com/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b2 on Thu Mar 18 1999 - 12:23:32 PST