[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2012 09:50:54 +0100
From: "Hans J. Koch" <hjk@...sjkoch.de>
To: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: "Hans J. Koch" <hjk@...sjkoch.de>,
Benedikt Spranger <b.spranger@...utronix.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Alexander.Frank@...rspaecher.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] uio: do not expose inode to uio open/release hooks
On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 08:46:48PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 02:42:22AM +0100, Hans J. Koch wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 03:20:32PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> > > On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 12:12:02AM +0100, Benedikt Spranger wrote:
> > > > The inode parameter is unused by in kernel users of UIO.
> > >
> > > Ok.
> > >
> > > > Also the inode parameter makes it hard to resolve the existing open(),
> > > > mmap() and close() difficulty.
> > >
> > > I don't understand, what do you mean by this? What is this parameter
> > > causing problems with?
> >
> > The problem is that according to POSIX, it is guaranteed that in userspace
> > you can do
> >
> > fd = open("/dev/uio0", ...)
> > ptr = mmap(...fd...)
> > close(fd)
> >
> > with ptr still being valid and useable after that.
>
> Yes, but what does that have to do with this in-kernel, internal api?
Ah, OK. You're right, the commit message is confusing.
Bene, it's enough to say we drop the inode parameter because nobody
ever needed it. I cannot see why this also helps with the other problem.
Thanks,
Hans
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists