Messages in this thread | | | From | David Mosberger <> | Date | Mon, 7 Jun 2004 16:27:29 -0700 | Subject | Re: Using getpid() often, another way? [was Re: clone() <-> getpid() bug in 2.6?] |
| |
>>>>> On Mon, 07 Jun 2004 19:02:34 -0400, Russell Leighton <russ@elegant-software.com> said:
Russell> So Ia64 does have it..that's good. Does glibc wrap it?
Here is how it works at the user-level:
- There _is_ a clone(), with the original interface. However, this version only works when you create a new address-space.
- There is clone2(), which adds the extra "size" argument. This one works for all cases.
Russell> I agree with the above...could glibc's clone() should have Russell> a size added? Then the arch specific stack issues could be Russell> hidden.
In my opinion, it would make sense for all platforms to support clone2(), since it's more in line with the normal UNIX-convention of specifying stacks as a memory-range (e.g., see stack_t). So far, the interest in doing this has been lack-luster (and, IIRC, Linus was against it in the past, so I haven't spent a lot of effort on it).
--david - 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/
| |