From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sukadev Bhattiprolu Subject: Re: [RFC][v8][PATCH 9/10]: Define clone3() syscall Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 11:06:31 -0700 Message-ID: <20091016180631.GA31036@us.ibm.com> References: <20091013044925.GA28181@us.ibm.com> <20091013045439.GI28435@us.ibm.com> <20091016042041.GA7220@us.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-api-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: mtk.manpages-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org Cc: linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Oren Laadan , serue-r/Jw6+rmf7HQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, "Eric W. Biederman" , Alexey Dobriyan , Pavel Emelyanov , Andrew Morton , torvalds-de/tnXTf+JLsfHDXvbKv3WD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org, mikew-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, mingo-X9Un+BFzKDI@public.gmane.org, hpa-YMNOUZJC4hwAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org, Nathan Lynch , arnd-r2nGTMty4D4@public.gmane.org, peterz-wEGCiKHe2LqWVfeAwA7xHQ@public.gmane.org, Louis.Rilling-aw0BnHfMbSpBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org, roland-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, kosaki.motohiro-+CUm20s59erQFUHtdCDX3A@public.gmane.org, randy.dunlap-QHcLZuEGTsvQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, linux-api-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Containers , sukadev-r/Jw6+rmf7HQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-api@vger.kernel.org Michael Kerrisk [mtk.manpages-gM/Ye1E23mwN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org] wrote: | Hi Sukadev |=20 | On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 6:20 AM, Sukadev Bhattiprolu | wrote: | > Here is an updated patch with the following interface: | > | > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0long sys_clone3(unsigned int flags_low, struct clone= _args __user *cs, | > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0pid_t *pids); | > | > There are just two other (minor) changes pending to this patchset: | > | > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0- PATCH 7: add a CLONE_UNUSED bit to VALID_CLONE_FLA= GS(). | > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0- PATCH 10: update documentation to reflect new inte= rface. | > | > If this looks ok, we repost entire patchset next week. |=20 | I know I'm late to this discussion, but why the name clone3()? It's | not consistent with any other convention used fo syscall naming, | AFAICS. I think a name like clone_ext() or clonex() (for extended) | might make more sense. Sure, we talked about calling it clone_extended() and I can go back to that. Only minor concern with that name was if this new call ever needs to be extended, what would we call it :-). With clone3() we could add a real/fake parameter and call it clone4() :-p Sukadev