Re: [discuss] Re: unregister_ioctl32_conversion and modules. ioctl32 revisited.
From: Andi Kleen
Date: Thu Dec 16 2004 - 00:08:53 EST
On Wed, Dec 15, 2004 at 01:30:59PM -0500, Lee Revell wrote:
> On Wed, 2004-12-15 at 19:20 +0100, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > At Wed, 15 Dec 2004 09:46:35 +0200,
> > Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > >
> > > There were two additional motivations for my patch:
> > > 1. Make it possible to avoid the BKL completely by writing
> > > an ioctl with proper internal locking.
> > > 2. As noted by Juergen Kreileder, the compat hash does not work
> > > for ioctls that encode additional information in the command, like this:
> > >
> > > #define EVIOCGBIT(ev,len) _IOC(_IOC_READ, 'E', 0x20 + ev, len)
> > I like the idea very well. Other benifits in addition:
> How does this all relate to Ingo's ->unlocked_ioctl stuff which is "an
> official way to do BKL-less ioctls"?
This is another "official" way which is more powerful. I suppose it will
replace Ingo's patch.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/