Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 27 Dec 2004 13:49:21 +0200 | From | "Michael S. Tsirkin" <> | Subject | Re: [discuss] Re: unregister_ioctl32_conversion and modules. ioct l32 revisited. |
| |
Hello! Quoting r. Arnd Bergmann (arnd@arndb.de) "Re: [discuss] Re: unregister_ioctl32_conversion and modules. ioct l32 revisited.": > On Sünndag 26 Dezember 2004 23:26, Chris Wedgwood wrote: > > > It's an internal error code as Arnd pointed out. > > > > can we be sure this will never escape to userspace? i can think of > > somewhere else we already do this (EFSCORRUPTED) and it does (somewhat > > deliberately escape to userspace) and this causes confusion from time > > to time when applications see 'errno == 990' > > It's safe for the compat ioctl case. If someone wants to use the > same function for the compat and native handler, it would be a bug > to return -ENOIOCTLCMD from that handler with the current code. > > To work around this, we could either convert -ENOIOCTLCMD to -EINVAL > when returning from sys_ioctl().
That would be -ENOTTY, I think.
> Or we could WARN_ON(err == > -ENOIOCTLCMD) > for the native path in order to make the intention clear. > > Arnd <>< - 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/
| |