Al Viro wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 07:23:40AM -0700, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
>> Hi, Pavel,
>>
>> [Adding Ulrich]
>>
>>> I use the last bit in the clone_flags for CLONE_LONGARG. When set it
>>> will denote that the child_tidptr is not a pointer to a tid storage,
>>> but the pointer to the struct long_clone_struct which currently
>>> looks like this:
>> I'm probably just totally off the deep end, but something did occur to
>> me: this looks an awful lot like a special version of the sys_indirect()
>> idea. Unless it has been somehow decided that sys_indirect() is the
>> wrong idea, might it not be better to look at making that interface
>> solve the extended clone() problem as well?
>
> Nah, just put an XML parser into the kernel to have the form match the
> contents...
>
> Al "perhaps we should newgroup alt.tasteless.api for all that stuff" Viro
so you'd rather have new syscalls to support new clone flags ? something
like :
long sys_clone64(unsigned long flags_high, unsigned long flag_low)
long sys_unshare64(unsigned long flags_high, unsigned long flag_low)
Thanks,
C.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
