On Wed, 30 Sep 2009, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > One more argument for this is that the new code is architecture independent > using user_stack_pointer(), while the original sys_clone is highly > architecture specific, which is a source for bugs when trying to > extend it. Umm. I don't think that is possible. You need architecture-specific code to even get access to all registers to copy and get a signal-handler-compatible stack frame. See for example arch/alpha/kernel/entry.S with the switch-stack thing etc. I don't think there is any way to make that even remotely architecture-neutral. Linus _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
