From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nadia Derbey Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/5] Resend -v2 - Use procfs to change a syscall behavior Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2008 11:54:07 +0200 Message-ID: <4875DC3F.6090002@bull.net> References: <20080708112422.164370000@bull.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: containers-bounces-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org Errors-To: containers-bounces-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org To: "Eric W. Biederman" Cc: containers-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org List-Id: containers.vger.kernel.org Eric W. Biederman wrote: > Nadia.Derbey-6ktuUTfB/bM@public.gmane.org writes: > > >>This patchset is a part of an effort to change some syscalls behavior for >>checkpoint restart. > > > Thanks for doing this. > > Unfortunately this makes a very good case of why we don't want to go down > this route. Adding magic parameters to syscalls that are only useful > in one very specific restart case. > > We need good clean interfaces with well defined semantics. > > Something as narrow focused on this is not really useful and it takes > a lot of code to do something very few people will want to actively > do. All this seems reasonable. Ok, so since we are taking the "new syscalls" direction, I'll try to make a list of the potentially duplicated syscalls. Regards, Nadia > > >>The syntax is: >># echo "LONG1 XX" > /proc/self/task//next_syscall_data >> next object to be created will have an id set to XX > > > Which his horrible in another way because it is hugely race prone. > > Eric > > >