From: JANAK DESAI <janak@us.ibm.com>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Cc: akpm@osdl.org, viro@ftp.linux.org.uk, dwmw2@infradead.org,
chrisw@sous-sol.org, jamie@shareable.org, serue@us.ibm.com,
sds@tycho.nsa.gov, sgrubb@redhat.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm 2/10] unshare system call -v5 : system call handler function
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 09:06:52 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <43C6627C.4060302@us.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <m1oe2irmsh.fsf@ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com>
Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>JANAK DESAI <janak@us.ibm.com> writes:
>
>
>
>>[PATCH -mm 2/10] unshare system call: system call handler function
>>
>>sys_unshare system call handler function accepts the same flags as
>>clone system call, checks constraints on each of the flags and invokes
>>corresponding unshare functions to disassociate respective process
>>context if it was being shared with another task.
>>
>>
>
>I'm going to log my objection again that you have you are
>scrambling the sense of the bits as compare to clone and that
>is very confusing.
>
>
>Eric
>-
>To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
>the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>
>
>
>
Thanks, I do understand your objection. In the document file describing
the feature
I did mention the bit inversion as a source for confusion. However, I
found the
alternatives to be even more confusing. I went back to the original
discussion of
unshare interface on lkml in August of 2000 and in one of the posts
Linus indicated
that it makes sense for unshare(CLONE_FILES) to undo the sharing done by
clone(CLONE_FILES). So I stuck with what I had in the patch posted in mid
December.
http://www.ussg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0008.3/0662.html
-Janak
prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-01-12 14:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-01-12 4:10 [PATCH -mm 2/10] unshare system call -v5 : system call handler function JANAK DESAI
2006-01-12 6:19 ` Eric W. Biederman
2006-01-12 14:06 ` JANAK DESAI [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=43C6627C.4060302@us.ibm.com \
--to=janak@us.ibm.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=chrisw@sous-sol.org \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=jamie@shareable.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sds@tycho.nsa.gov \
--cc=serue@us.ibm.com \
--cc=sgrubb@redhat.com \
--cc=viro@ftp.linux.org.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox