Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030313AbWALOHZ (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Jan 2006 09:07:25 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1030400AbWALOHZ (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Jan 2006 09:07:25 -0500 Received: from e36.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.154]:7883 "EHLO e36.co.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030313AbWALOHZ (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Jan 2006 09:07:25 -0500 Message-ID: <43C6627C.4060302@us.ibm.com> Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 09:06:52 -0500 From: JANAK DESAI User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20050922 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Eric W. Biederman" 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 References: <1137038992.7488.206.camel@hobbes.atlanta.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1640 Lines: 51 Eric W. Biederman wrote: >JANAK DESAI 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 - 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/