From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arnd Bergmann Subject: Re: [RFC][v7][PATCH 8/9]: Define clone2() syscall Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2009 18:15:44 +0200 Message-ID: <200909301815.45211.arnd@arndb.de> References: <20090924165548.GA16586@us.ibm.com> <4AC287F2.8060603@zytor.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4AC287F2.8060603-YMNOUZJC4hwAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-api-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: "H. Peter Anvin" Cc: Linus Torvalds , Arjan van de Ven , Roland McGrath , Sukadev Bhattiprolu , Containers , Nathan Lynch , linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, "Eric W. Biederman" , mingo-X9Un+BFzKDI@public.gmane.org, Alexey Dobriyan , Pavel Emelyanov , linux-api-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, kosaki.motohiro-+CUm20s59erQFUHtdCDX3A@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-api@vger.kernel.org On Wednesday 30 September 2009, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > Let's just make it another system call. It doesn't have any downside > that I can see, might prevent problems, and avoids setting a bad > precedent that someone can misinterpret. One more argument for this is that the new code is architecture independent using user_stack_pointer(), while the original sys_clone is highly architecture specific, which is a source for bugs when trying to extend it. Arnd <>< -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-api" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html