[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87wocn39fu.fsf@oldenburg2.str.redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2019 15:36:37 +0100
From: Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>
To: Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@...ntu.com>
Cc: Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
Michael Kerrisk-manpages <mtk.manpages@...il.com>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-man <linux-man@...r.kernel.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
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: For review: documentation of clone3() system call
* Christian Brauner:
> @Florian, do you have an opinion about always passing the stack from the
> lowest address with clone3()?
Do you mean that the stack extends from stack to stack_size? I guess
that makes sense. What about architectures which need two stacks (I
think ia64 is one)?
There is also the matter whose responsibility is the alignment of the
initial stack pointer.
Thanks,
Florian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists