Alan Cox wrote:
>>3. Why do we have something like genric cdrom ioctl handling layer,
>> which is basically just adding the above hooks?
>
> That bit is needed. You want unpriviledged processes to issue a subset of
> the available commands so users can do things like play music. Those ioctls
> for CDROM are also rather important for back compatibility.
>
> Thats a seperate but important case.
>
> There are two things I think you must consider
>
> #1 "Make the simple things easy" - abstract common cd interface and
> friends. Unpriviledged but with strict limits on what can be issued
>
> #2 "Make the hard possible" - the direct "I know what I am doing"
> CAP_SYS_RAWIO interface
>
> #3 Ioctls that must be issued with kernel help because they change
> interface status and must synchronize both the device and the
> controller (eg 'go to UDMA3')
>
> What can hopefully go is ioctls that are complex, setuid required and
> could be done by #2.
Amen. I was of course not arguing against the cdrom abstraction layer.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Mar 07 2002 - 21:00:55 EST