Herbert Poetzl wrote: > On Fri, Dec 08, 2006 at 12:26:49PM -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote: >> clg at fr.ibm.com writes: >> >>> From: Cedric Le Goater <clg at fr.ibm.com> >>> >>> The following patch defines 2 new syscalls specific to nsproxy and >>> namespaces : >>> >>> * unshare_ns : >>> >>> enables a process to unshare one or more namespaces. this >>> duplicates the unshare syscall for the moment but we >>> expect to diverge when the number of namespaces increases >> Are we out of clone flags yet? If not this is premature. > > no, but a different nevertheless related question: > does anybody, except for 'us' use the unshare() syscall? > > because if not, then why not simply extend that one > to 64bit and be done, we probably won't need a clone64() > but if we find we do (at some point) adding that with > the new flags would be trivial ... > > OTOH, we could also just add an unshare64() too > > anyway, we _will_ run out of flags in the near future yes. that's probably the way to go. I'll rework unshare_ns() in a unshare64(). it will give some air to the 32bits clone() and unshare() and will let us use the >32bits flags for namespaces. thanks, C.