Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757883AbZJSVju (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Oct 2009 17:39:50 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1757768AbZJSVjt (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Oct 2009 17:39:49 -0400 Received: from terminus.zytor.com ([198.137.202.10]:47163 "EHLO terminus.zytor.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757763AbZJSVjs (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Oct 2009 17:39:48 -0400 Message-ID: <4ADCDAA8.5080408@zytor.com> Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 06:31:20 +0900 From: "H. Peter Anvin" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.4pre) Gecko/20091014 Fedora/3.0-2.8.b4.fc11 Thunderbird/3.0b4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Matt Helsley CC: Sukadev Bhattiprolu , mtk.manpages@gmail.com, randy.dunlap@oracle.com, arnd@arndb.de, Containers , Nathan Lynch , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Louis.Rilling@kerlabs.com, "Eric W. Biederman" , kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com, mingo@elte.hu, linux-api@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, Alexey Dobriyan , roland@redhat.com, Pavel Emelyanov Subject: Re: [RFC][v8][PATCH 9/10]: Define clone3() syscall References: <20091013044925.GA28181@us.ibm.com> <20091013045439.GI28435@us.ibm.com> <20091016042041.GA7220@us.ibm.com> <20091016180631.GA31036@us.ibm.com> <20091019174405.GE27627@count0.beaverton.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <20091019174405.GE27627@count0.beaverton.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1184 Lines: 32 On 10/20/2009 02:44 AM, Matt Helsley wrote: >> | >> | 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, This assumption, of course, is just plain wrong. Look at the wait system calls, for example. However, when a small integer is used like that, it pretty much always reflects numbers of arguments. >> | 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 > > Perhaps clone64 (somewhat like stat64 for example)? > I think that doesn't exactly reflect the nature of the changes. clone3() is actually pretty good. -hpa -- 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/