On Fri, Nov 08, 2019 at 07:44:16AM +0100, Adrian Reber wrote: > On Wed, Nov 06, 2019 at 04:59:15PM +0100, Christian Brauner wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 04, 2019 at 02:18:46PM +0100, Adrian Reber wrote: > Not sure myself. It was just to make sure clone3() does not something > unexpected when given wrong and unexpected input. It is the opposite to > setting everything to zero. Not sure how much sense it makes, but as it > already exists I would say to just keep it. If it serves no real purpose then please remove it. It's not clear from thist test _why_ it it expected to fail. Is it because of invalid stack and stack_size or invalid tls etc. > > > > + args.flags = 1; > > > + args.pidfd = 1; > > > + args.child_tid = 1; > > > + args.parent_tid = 1; > > > + args.exit_signal = 1; > > > + args.stack = 1; > > > + args.stack_size = 1; > > > + args.tls = 1; > > > + break; > > > + case CLONE3_ARGS_INVAL_EXIT_SIGNAL_BIG: > [...] > > Let me know if you think that the CLONE3_ARGS_ALL_1 should really be > removed. I will fix the other two things you mentioned and resend a new > version. Yes, please. Christian
