On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 08:17:58PM +0100, Dmitry Safonov wrote: > On Mon, 29 Jul 2019 at 20:12, Dmitry Safonov <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Mon, 29 Jul 2019 at 17:52, Adrian Reber <[email protected]> wrote: > > [..] > > > --- a/include/uapi/linux/sched.h > > > +++ b/include/uapi/linux/sched.h > > > @@ -32,6 +32,7 @@ > > > #define CLONE_NEWPID 0x20000000 /* New pid namespace */ > > > #define CLONE_NEWNET 0x40000000 /* New network namespace > > > */ > > > #define CLONE_IO 0x80000000 /* Clone io context */ > > > +#define CLONE_SET_TID 0x100000000ULL /* set if the desired TID > > > is set in set_tid */ > > > > > > /* > > > * Arguments for the clone3 syscall > > > @@ -45,6 +46,7 @@ struct clone_args { > > > __aligned_u64 stack; > > > __aligned_u64 stack_size; > > > __aligned_u64 tls; > > > + __aligned_u64 set_tid; > > > }; > > > > > > > I don't see a change to > > : if (unlikely(size < sizeof(struct clone_args))) > > : return -EINVAL; > > > > That seems backwards-incompatible, but I may miss some part.. > > On the other hand, clone3() was merged in v5.3 window, so probably, > it doesn't matter.
It would matter. Even if this were to be accepted and preferred over the existing /proc/sys/kernel/ns_last_pid interface the earliest point in time I'd consider this for would be 5.4. So I think this would need to be changed. :) Christian
