From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][v7][PATCH 8/9]: Define clone2() syscall
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2009 18:15:44 +0200
User-Agent: KMail/1.12.1 (Linux/2.6.31-11-generic; KDE/4.3.1; x86_64; ; )
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
       Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>,
       Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com>,
       Sukadev Bhattiprolu <sukadev@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
       Containers <containers@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
       Nathan Lynch <nathanl@austin.ibm.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
       "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>, mingo@elte.hu,
       Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>,
       Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@openvz.org>, linux-api@vger.kernel.org,
       kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com
References: <20090924165548.GA16586@us.ibm.com> <alpine.LFD.2.01.0909291501530.6996@localhost.localdomain> <4AC287F2.8060603@zytor.com>
In-Reply-To: <4AC287F2.8060603@zytor.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <200909301815.45211.arnd@arndb.de>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 712
Lines: 16

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-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/