linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] parport/ppdev: fix registration of sysctl entries

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sun, 6 Jul 2008 19:22:33 +0300
From:	Eduard - Gabriel Munteanu <eduard.munteanu@...ux360.ro>
To:	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
Cc:	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
	Marcin Slusarz <marcin.slusarz@...il.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Frans Pop <elendil@...net.nl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] parport/ppdev: fix registration of sysctl entries

On Sun, 6 Jul 2008 09:11:26 +0100
Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk> wrote:

> On Sat, Jul 05, 2008 at 11:49:26PM -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> > So our choices appear to be.
> > - Change the name in sysctl so each parport device always has a
> > unique name.
> > - Only allow one opener of ppdev for a given port.
> 
> Can't do - it's a legitimate use of ppdev (several userland programs
> multiplexing the sucker).

How in the world would such a thing work?! I imagine one could
read()/write() there and multiplex data, but isn't the whole point of
ppdev to allow non-standard communication (manually flipping control
and data lines)? I've used it for custom hardware.

IMHO, there is one reason ppdev exists: allow both _safe_ and _raw_
access to the parallel port, and a much better alternative to the iopl
stuff.


	Eduard
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/