[Devel] Re: [PATCH 1/1] implement s390 clone_with_pids syscall

[Serge E. Hallyn]

Quoting Nathan Lynch (nathanl at austin.ibm.com):
> Something I missed earlier is that the stack_size you are passing in
> from user space is not actually the size of the stack.  It's adjusted to
> account for arguments that have been placed at the end of the stack
> region.  So stack_size becomes a value that you want the kernel to add
> to stack_base to get the desired stack pointer value in the child --
> it's not a size at all.  At this point we may as well communicate the
> desired stack pointer value directly (which could be denoted by
> stack_size == 0, or we could add another member to clone_args), or
> rename stack_size to stack_offset or similar.

So do I understand correctly that the agreement (reached on irc) is
to keep passing in a stack_size, but enforce that it ==0 for all but
ia64?

-serge
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers at lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers