linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Change paride driver to use unlocked

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20080110205826.7c41b247@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Date:	Thu, 10 Jan 2008 20:58:26 +0000
From:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To:	Jiri Kosina <jikos@...os.cz>
Cc:	Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>,
	Nikanth Karthikesan <knikanth@...e.de>, grant@...que.net,
	tim@...erelk.net, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Change paride driver to use unlocked_ioctl instead of
 ioctl

On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 16:01:44 +0100 (CET)
Jiri Kosina <jikos@...os.cz> wrote:

> On Wed, 9 Jan 2008, Alan Cox wrote:
> 
> > > > >  	default:
> > > > >  		printk("%s: Unimplemented ioctl 0x%x\n", tape->name, cmd);
> > > > > +		unlock_kernel();
> > > > >  		return -EINVAL;
> > > > Surely a bug ... shouldn't this return -ENOTTY?
> > Agreed - ENOTTY. 
> 
> Just out of curiosity, where does POSIX happen to specify ENOTTY as the 
> correct one for unimplemented ioctl?

I don't know if POSIX does, but Unix has always used ENOTTY for "I don't
know what this ioctl is" and -EINVAL "for I know what this ioctl is but
the values passed are stupid"
--
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/