On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 04:49:05PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > On 10/12/2009 09:49 PM, Sukadev Bhattiprolu wrote: > > > > This patchset implements a new system call, clone3() that lets a process > > specify the pids of the child process. > > > > A system call named clone3() taking two parameters is just too weird to > live. No, please. Except we can't use clone2() because it conflicts on ia64. Care to propose a name you would prefer? Also I was a bit suprised to discover there are plenty of examples where this convention has not been followed: vm86, lseek64, and mmap2 to name a few. In fact, of the 46 __NR_foo[[:digit:]]+, 36 break this convention on x86-32. Cheers, -Matt Helsley _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
