linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] Remove or convert empty ioctls ?

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]

Message-ID: <4AD73E40.1010501@garzik.org>
Date:	Thu, 15 Oct 2009 11:22:40 -0400
From:	Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
To:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
CC:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Remove or convert empty ioctls ?

On 10/15/2009 11:01 AM, Alan Cox wrote:
>> "no particular value" is highly subjective, and I think unprovable,
>> without an exhaustive survey of userland programs interacting with
>> kernel drivers.  Userland programs often interact with a -class- of
>> drivers, expecting predictable behavior from a DoThisThing ioctl, with
>> EINVAL or "other weird error code" returned intentionally.
>>
>> Changing the return codes seems quite unwise.
>
> We've changed lots of them to -ENOTTY over the past few years, nobody has
> even noticed (you included ;))
>
> SuS says an unknown ioctl code returns -ENOTTY.

These are not unknown ioctls; they are ioctls that the driver author 
close to implement rather than the default (ENOTTY).

	Jeff




--
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/