Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2022 18:00:42 +0200
From: Markus Wichmann <>
Subject: Re: Re: add loongarch64 port

On Wed, Apr 06, 2022 at 10:08:24AM +0800, 王洪亮 wrote:
> Hi, Rich
> within __clone() implement __NR_clone3 syscall,
> will that confusion between clone and clone3?
> Hongliang Wang

__clone() is a function with a defined interface. How it is implemented
is not given in the name. Why should __clone() have to be implemented
using the SYS_clone system call? If I understood the thread so far
correctly, the final kernel will not even have SYS_clone.

Compare with open(), which is often implemented in terms of SYS_openat
instead of SYS_open. Or qsort(), which, despite the name, is rarely
implemented as a quicksort.

So no, there will be no confusion of system calls because a function is
not implemented in terms of the system call of the same name, as long as
the function fulfills the defined interface.


Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.