Re: [RFC v14-rc3][PATCH 36/36] Stub implementation of IPC namespace c/r

["Serge E. Hallyn" <serue-r/Jw6+rmf7HQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>]

Quoting Oren Laadan (orenl-eQaUEPhvms7ENvBUuze7eA@public.gmane.org):
> From: Dan Smith <danms-r/Jw6+rmf7HQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
> 
> Changes:
>  - Update to match UTS changes
> 
> Signed-off-by: Dan Smith <danms-r/Jw6+rmf7HQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
> Signed-off-by: Oren Laadan <orenl-eQaUEPhvms7ENvBUuze7eA@public.gmane.org>

Acked-by: Serge Hallyn <serue-r/Jw6+rmf7HQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>

However...

> +	if (!!ipc_ns ^ !(flags & CLONE_NEWIPC))
> +		return -EINVAL;

Every time I see this I have to think about whether it is right or not.
I'm not sure whether it's worth commenting (at each such meme) that
CLONE_NEWIPC only needed to be set the first time we ran across that
ipcns, or whether it's indicative that there is a simpler way the code
could be done.  But if it just took me a twice-over to see that it's
right, when I'd already confirmed that with the CLONE_NEWUTS version
last week, then a fresh reviewer will be cursing your name...

-serge