Re: [PATCH -mm 2/10] unshare system call -v5 : system call handler function

[JANAK DESAI <janak@us.ibm.com>]

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/