[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAK8P3a0qBaQGu2h3yG45kvf=cgiQfkeiFw60WvD47H4BoEJiyQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2019 12:36:24 +0200
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: Christian Brauner <christian@...uner.io>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...tuozzo.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Adrian Reber <adrian@...as.de>,
Andrei Vagin <avagin@...il.com>,
Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] fork: add clone3
On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 4:44 PM Christian Brauner <christian@...uner.io> wrote:
> +
> +#ifdef __ARCH_WANT_SYS_CLONE
> +asmlinkage long sys_clone3(struct clone_args __user *uargs, size_t size);
> +#endif
I would leave it outside of __ARCH_WANT_SYS_CLONE, as far
as I can tell the only reason for that #ifdef is so architectures that
have their own sys_clone implementation can opt out of the generic
one, but we don't want that for new syscalls.
In fact, I'd prefer to drop the symbol entirely and have a different
symbol with the opposite meaning such as
__ARCH_NONSTANDARD_SYS_CLONE that only gets
selected by sparc, ia64 and m68k. That should be a separate
patch though, and I'm not asking you to do it, unless you
want to clean up a little more.
Arnd
Powered by blists - more mailing lists