| Re: Re: [patch -mm 10/17] nsproxy: add unshare_ns and bind_ns syscalls [message #8938] |
Mon, 11 December 2006 16:44 |
Cedric Le Goater
Messages: 443
Registered: February 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> because if not, then why not simply extend that one
>> to 64bit and be done, we probably won't need a clone64()
>> but if we find we do (at some point) adding that with
>> the new flags would be trivial ...
>>
>> OTOH, we could also just add an unshare64() too
>>
>> anyway, we _will_ run out of flags in the near future
>
> Agreed. Please let's cross that bridge when we come to it.
How many are left right now ? isn't it 4 ?
#define CLONE_CHILD_SETTID 0x01000000 /* set the TID in the child */
#define CLONE_STOPPED 0x02000000 /* Start in stopped state */
#define CLONE_NEWUTS 0x04000000 /* New utsname group? */
#define CLONE_NEWIPC 0x08000000 /* New ipcs */
#define CLONE_NEWPID 0x10000000
#define CLONE_NEWUSER 0x20000000
#define CLONE_NEWNET 0x40000000
0x80000000
I think the bridge is crossed. Leaving one available clone
flag is not an option to me.
C.
|
|
|
|
OpenVZ Forum
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
