Re: Using getpid() often, another way? [was Re: clone() <-> getpid() bug in 2.6?]

[Eric W. Biederman]

Arjan van de Ven <arjanv@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> On Mon, Jun 07, 2004 at 07:02:34PM -0400, Russell Leighton wrote:
> > >
> > So Ia64 does have it..that's good. Does glibc wrap it?
> > 
> > I agree with the above...could glibc's clone() should have a size added? 
> > Then the arch specific stack issues
> > could be hidden.
> 
> glibc doesn't provide clone other than a raw syscall wrapper, under the
> assumption that when you want threads, you'll use it's thread creation call.
> Not too unfair imo.

That fn parameter certainly more than a raw wrapper.  I do agree that
what is needed is a fairly raw wrapper though. 

I don't see how creating a clone2 wrapper that drops the extra argument
on platforms that don't use it is any different than what glibc already
does though.

Eric


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/