Messages in this thread | | | From | "Khimenko Victor" <> | Date | Tue, 25 Jul 2000 22:54:36 +0400 (MSD) | Subject | Re: Direct access to hardware |
| |
In <Pine.LNX.4.10.10007251922260.15969-100000@dax.joh.cam.ac.uk> James Sutherland (jas88@cam.ac.uk) wrote: > On Tue, 25 Jul 2000, Paul Barton-Davis wrote:
>> James Sutherland <jas88@cam.ac.uk> writes: >> >On Tue, 25 Jul 2000, Stephen Frost wrote: >> >> The kernel provides a nice clean interface to devices which conform to >> >> the spec. Note that such raw access is, from what I can tell, part of >> >> the spec, just the specific data sent using it isn't specified in the >> >> spec and has been used by vendors to provide vendor-specific hooks, >> >> which reminds me of 'SCSI generic'... >> > >> >It's dangerous - and the only legitimate use of this "feature" is one >> >which shouldn't be done from within Linux in the first place. >> >> let me get this straight. are you saying that the "jaz" utility which >> lets me password-protect write access to my jaz disks should not exist >> under Linux ? this utility requires the ability to send that are >> vendor-and-device-specific SCSI commands to the drive.
> That doesn't sound like a good implementation, but I doubt these commands > would be in the same category of command as the flash update ones. I'm > interested in the dangerous category, not the merely undocumented bits.
They ARE in the same category (from kernel viewpoint). There are NO WAY to distinguish them in generic driver.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |