Jakub Jelinek [jakub@redhat.com] wrote:
| On Wed, Apr 09, 2008 at 03:34:59PM -0700, sukadev@us.ibm.com wrote:
| > From: Cedric Le Goater <clg@fr.ibm.com>
| > Subject: [PATCH 3/3] add the clone64() and unshare64() syscalls
| > 
| > This patch adds 2 new syscalls :
| > 
| >      long sys_clone64(unsigned long flags_high, unsigned long flags_low,
| > 		unsigned long newsp);
| > 
| >      long sys_unshare64(unsigned long flags_high, unsigned long flags_low);
| 
| Can you explain why are you adding it for 64-bit arches too?  unsigned long
| is there already 64-bit, and both sys_clone and sys_unshare have unsigned
| long flags, rather than unsigned int.

Hmm,

By simply resuing clone() on 64 bit and adding a new call for 32-bit won't
the semantics of clone() differ between the two ?

i.e clone() on 64 bit supports say CLONE_NEWPTS clone() on 32bit does not ?

Wouldn't it be simpler/cleaner if clone() and clone64() behaved the same
on both 32 and 64 bit systems ?

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