Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2004 00:53:14 +0300
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@mellanox.co.il>
To: linux-kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: f_ops flag to speed up compatible ioctls in linux kernel
Message-ID: <20040901215314.GC26044@mellanox.co.il>
Reply-To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@mellanox.co.il>
References: <1094052981.431.7160.camel@cube> <52vfey0ylu.fsf@topspin.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <52vfey0ylu.fsf@topspin.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1167
Lines: 26

Hello!
Quoting r. Roland Dreier (roland@topspin.com) "Re: f_ops flag to speed up compatible ioctls in linux kernel":
>     Albert> Per-command parameters included?
> 
>     Albert> People really do want private syscalls. An ioctl is that,
>     Albert> in a namespace defined by the file descriptor. So ioctl()
>     Albert> provides local scope to something that would otherwise be
>     Albert> global.
> 
> Yes, this is exactly right.  One issue raised by this thread is that
> the ioctl32 compatibility code only allows one compatibility handler
> per ioctl number.  It seems that this creates all sorts of
> possibilities for mayhem because it makes the ioctl namespace global
> in scope in some situations.  Does anyone have any thoughts on if/how
> this should be addressed.
> 

Thats what my original patch attempts to address
http://www.uwsg.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0409.0/0025.html
What do you think?

-
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/