From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932725AbWCPUhD (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Mar 2006 15:37:03 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932724AbWCPUhD (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Mar 2006 15:37:03 -0500 Received: from smtp.osdl.org ([65.172.181.4]:34986 "EHLO smtp.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964808AbWCPUhA (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Mar 2006 15:37:00 -0500 Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 12:33:41 -0800 From: Andrew Morton To: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) Cc: torvalds@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, janak@us.ibm.com, viro@ftp.linux.org.uk, hch@lst.de, mtk-manpages@gmx.net, ak@muc.de, paulus@samba.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] unshare: Cleanup up the sys_unshare interface before we are committed. Message-Id: <20060316123341.0f55fd07.akpm@osdl.org> In-Reply-To: References: X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 1.0.4 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-redhat-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) wrote: > > Since we have not crossed the magic 2.6.16 line can we please > include this patch. My apologies for catching this so late in the > cycle. > > - Error if we are passed any flags we don't expect. > > This preserves forward compatibility so programs that use new flags that > run on old kernels will fail instead of silently doing the wrong thing. Makes sense. > - Use separate defines from sys_clone. > > sys_unshare can't implement half of the clone flags under any circumstances > and those that it does implement have subtlely different semantics than > the clone flags. Using a different set of flags sets the > expectation that things will be different. iirc there was some discussion about this and it was explicitly decided to keep the CLONE flags. Maybe Janak or Linus can comment?