[lkml]   [2009]   [Sep]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [RFC][v6][PATCH 0/9] clone_with_pids() syscall
On Fri, 2009-09-11 at 13:34 +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Friday 11 September 2009, Peter Zijlstra wrote:

> > If you then get passed a longer clone_struct than you know about, all is
> > well IFF the tail is 0, otherwise fail with -E2BIG.
> >
> > If you get passed a short clone_struct, zero out the tail.
> I would leave out the size argument. We can put a few reserved fields
> and flag bits in there for possible extensions, but if we ever run out
> of these, just define a new syscall.

Why? If we can avoid this new syscall isn't that nicer?

> Also, if you're passing a struct, why not put nr_pids in there, and
> replace clone_pid_struct with a simple array? That would give us


 \ /
  Last update: 2009-09-11 13:45    [W:0.067 / U:0.108 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site