[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090911164703.GA29169@us.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2009 09:47:03 -0700
From: Sukadev Bhattiprolu <sukadev@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Oren Laadan <orenl@...columbia.edu>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...nvz.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
mikew@...gle.com, mingo@...e.hu, hpa@...or.com,
Nathan Lynch <nathanl@...tin.ibm.com>, container@...ibm.com,
sukadev@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: [RFC][v6][PATCH 0/9] clone_with_pids() syscall
| Also, if you're passing a struct, why not put nr_pids in there, and
| replace clone_pid_struct with a simple array? That would give us
|
| struct clone_struct {
| u64 flags;
| u64 child_stack;
| u32 child_tid;
| u32 parent_tid;
| u32 nr_pids;
| u32 reserved1;
| u64 reserved2;
| };
|
| int clone2(struct clone_struct *cs, pid_t *pids);
My only concern with this approach was the extra copy_from_user() in the
common case (i.e when not using the extended features). I assume the
overhead of copy_from_user() is small enough to be ignored ?
Thanks,
Sukadev
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists