Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: Using getpid() often, another way? [was Re: clone() <-> getpid() bug in 2.6?] | From | (Eric W. Biederman) | Date | 08 Jun 2004 03:48:11 -0600 |
| |
Arjan van de Ven <arjanv@redhat.com> writes:
> On Mon, Jun 07, 2004 at 07:02:34PM -0400, Russell Leighton wrote: > > > > > So Ia64 does have it..that's good. Does glibc wrap it? > > > > I agree with the above...could glibc's clone() should have a size added? > > Then the arch specific stack issues > > could be hidden. > > glibc doesn't provide clone other than a raw syscall wrapper, under the > assumption that when you want threads, you'll use it's thread creation call. > Not too unfair imo.
That fn parameter certainly more than a raw wrapper. I do agree that what is needed is a fairly raw wrapper though.
I don't see how creating a clone2 wrapper that drops the extra argument on platforms that don't use it is any different than what glibc already does though.
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/
| |