> Err, it is not what? Deterministic? Or safe? The point about it being 
> deterministic did not relate to when exactly the process would resume 
> (no real-time guarantee) but rather that it would resume 
> deterministically in relation to its parent process (in this case, only 
> after the parent process got suspended).

Not completely deterministic.  The behavior may change depending on 
whether there are other processes or not, that run at the active process 
priority.

What if you instead bumped a little the priority of the active process 
until the forked process started running?

Paolo