Re: [PATCH 0/3] clone64() and unshare64() system calls

[sukadev@us.ibm.com]

H. Peter Anvin [hpa@zytor.com] wrote:
>> Yes, this was discussed before in the context of Pavel Emelyanov's patch
>> 	http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/1/16/109
>> along with sys_indirect().  While there was no consensus, it looked like
>> adding a new system call was better than open ended interfaces.
>
> That's not really an open-ended interface, it's just an expandable bitmap.

Yes, we liked such an approach earlier too and its conceivable that we
will run out of the 64-bits too :-)

But as Jon Corbet pointed out in the the thread above, it looked like
adding a new system call has been the "traditional" way of solving this
in Linux so far and there has been no consensus on a newer approach.

Sukadev