ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx (Eric W. Biederman) wrote:In the two prior discussions on this, the disagreement was on how much confusion
Since we have not crossed the magic 2.6.16 line can we please
include this patch. My apologies for catching this so late in the
- Error if we are passed any flags we don't expect.
This preserves forward compatibility so programs that use new flags that
run on old kernels will fail instead of silently doing the wrong thing.
- Use separate defines from sys_clone.
sys_unshare can't implement half of the clone flags under any circumstances
and those that it does implement have subtlely different semantics than
the clone flags. Using a different set of flags sets the
expectation that things will be different.
iirc there was some discussion about this and it was explicitly decided to
keep the CLONE flags.
Maybe Janak or Linus can comment?