On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 5:37 PM, Mike Frysinger <vapier@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tuesday 16 April 2013 01:42:56 Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote: >> On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 9:03 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: >> > also, the quoted syscall signature isn't the whole story. there's >> > actually more variants: >> > #ifdef __ARCH_WANT_SYS_CLONE >> > #ifdef CONFIG_CLONE_BACKWARDS >> > SYSCALL_DEFINE5(clone, unsigned long, clone_flags, unsigned long, newsp, >> > int __user *, parent_tidptr, >> > int, tls_val, >> > int __user *, child_tidptr) >> > #elif defined(CONFIG_CLONE_BACKWARDS2) >> > SYSCALL_DEFINE5(clone, unsigned long, newsp, unsigned long, clone_flags, >> > int __user *, parent_tidptr, >> > int __user *, child_tidptr, >> > int, tls_val) >> > #else >> > SYSCALL_DEFINE5(clone, unsigned long, clone_flags, unsigned long, newsp, >> > int __user *, parent_tidptr, >> > int __user *, child_tidptr, >> > int, tls_val) >> > ... >> >> I've worked in some of the above detail; see the Git copy of the page. >> >> > these arches don't define __ARCH_WANT_SYS_CLONE: >> > blackfin ia64 m68k sparc >> >> I'm not sure of the significance of the above; can you explain? > > the three clone variants i posted above are bracketed by the define > __ARCH_WANT_SYS_CLONE. so if the arch doesn't define that, it means it has its > own implementation of clone() in its arch/$ARCH/ tree, so the exact prototype > has to be tracked down from there. Thanks Mike. I'll add a short subsection noting that these architectures are different. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-man" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
