Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Wed 2008-01-16 15:58:55, Pavel Emelyanov wrote:
>> There's only one bit in the clone_flags left, so we won't be able 
>> to create more namespaces after we make it busy. Besides, for 
>> checkpoint/restart jobs we might want to create tasks with given
>> pids (virtual of course). And nobody knows for sure what else might 
>> be required from clone() in the future.
>>
>> This is an attempt to create a extendable API for clone and unshare.
>> Actually this patch is a request for comment about the overall
>> design. If it will turn out to "look good", then we'll select some
>> better names for new flag and data types.
>>
>> 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:
>>
>> struct long_clone_arg {
>> 	int size;
>> };
> 
> Ugly as night, I'd say. (Al said it better). What about just adding
> clone2 syscall, that takes u64?

yes but we would need more something like  : 

 long sys_clone64(unsigned long flags_high, unsigned long flag_low)

if we want the syscall to be supported on 32bit arch. clone2 is also 
being used on ia64 already.

C.
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers