From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "H. Peter Anvin" Subject: Re: [RFC][v7][PATCH 8/9]: Define clone2() syscall Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2009 13:00:36 -0700 Message-ID: <4AC26764.10803@zytor.com> References: <20090924165548.GA16586@us.ibm.com> <20090924170308.GH16989@us.ibm.com> <200909242343.59903.arnd@arndb.de> <20090925082346.GB4436@localdomain> <20090925105632.GG12824@hawkmoon.kerlabs.com> <20090929180537.GD4625@us.ibm.com> <20090929184023.532DF34@magilla.sf.frob.com> <4AC255A4.4030002@zytor.com> <20090929210207.247b94df@infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20090929210207.247b94df@infradead.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Arjan van de Ven Cc: Roland McGrath , Sukadev Bhattiprolu , Arnd Bergmann , Containers , Nathan Lynch , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Eric W. Biederman" , mingo@elte.hu, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, Alexey Dobriyan , Pavel Emelyanov , linux-api@vger.kernel.org, kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com List-Id: linux-api@vger.kernel.org On 09/29/2009 12:02 PM, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > On Tue, 29 Sep 2009 11:44:52 -0700 > "H. Peter Anvin" wrote: > >> On 09/29/2009 11:40 AM, Roland McGrath wrote: >>> Why add a new syscall at all instead of just using a new CLONE_* >>> flag to indicate that the argument layout is different? >> >> What an absolutely atrociously bad idea. >> >> We already have a syscall layer which is painful to thunk in places, >> and this would make it much worse. >> > syscalls are cheap as well. > cheaper than decades of dealing with such multiplexer mess ;/ > It really comes down to wanting all the dispatch to happen in one central place. -hpa