Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2022 10:03:13 +0200 From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...nel.org> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Cc: Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org> Subject: Re: Re: add loongarch64 port On Sun, Apr 10, 2022 at 5:27 PM Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> wrote: > > On Sun, Apr 10, 2022 at 12:30:59PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > On Sat, Apr 9, 2022 at 3:31 PM Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> wrote: > > > > > > Actually, if there aren't yet archs lacking SYS_clone, this API > > > regression may be a good argument not to drop SYS_clone on new archs > > > yet until there's a way for new archs to get the same behavior > > > (unspecified stack size). > > > > That is a good point, but it also appears that the behavior of > > clone3() is unintentional > > here, I'm fairly sure it was meant to be a drop-in replacement for clone() with > > additional features. > > > > Not sure what the best fix for this is, as the check for size==0 was clearly > > intentional, but seems to prevent this from working. A special flag to ignore > > the size, or a magic size value like -1ull might work, but neither of them > > is a great interface. > > Are there archs already affected, or will this one be the first? We have not added any other architectures since clone3 got added, so this is the first one. Arnd
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.