Re: split receive_fd_replace from __receive_fd

[Christian Brauner]

On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 09:22:08AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> The receive_fd_replace case shares almost no logic with the more general
> __receive_fd case, so split it into a separate function.
> 
> BTW, I'm not sure if receive_fd_replace is such a useful primitive to
> start with, why not just open code it in seccomp?

I tend to agree and argued in a similar fashion back when we added this
but we ultimately decided to add it. So now we're back to the original
argument. :)

Christian