Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 12 Jan 2006 09:06:52 -0500 | From | JANAK DESAI <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH -mm 2/10] unshare system call -v5 : system call handler function |
| |
Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>JANAK DESAI <janak@us.ibm.com> writes: > > > >>[PATCH -mm 2/10] unshare system call: system call handler function >> >>sys_unshare system call handler function accepts the same flags as >>clone system call, checks constraints on each of the flags and invokes >>corresponding unshare functions to disassociate respective process >>context if it was being shared with another task. >> >> > >I'm going to log my objection again that you have you are >scrambling the sense of the bits as compare to clone and that >is very confusing. > > >Eric >- >To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in >the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org >More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ > > > > Thanks, I do understand your objection. In the document file describing the feature I did mention the bit inversion as a source for confusion. However, I found the alternatives to be even more confusing. I went back to the original discussion of unshare interface on lkml in August of 2000 and in one of the posts Linus indicated that it makes sense for unshare(CLONE_FILES) to undo the sharing done by clone(CLONE_FILES). So I stuck with what I had in the patch posted in mid December.
http://www.ussg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0008.3/0662.html
-Janak
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |