linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 1/4] uio: add ioctl support

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: <5614D502.3030601@cloudius-systems.com>
Date:	Wed, 7 Oct 2015 11:17:06 +0300
From:	Vlad Zolotarov <vladz@...udius-systems.com>
To:	Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mst@...hat.com, hjk@...sjkoch.de,
	corbet@....net, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
	bruce.richardson@...el.com, avi@...udius-systems.com,
	gleb@...udius-systems.com, alexander.duyck@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/4] uio: add ioctl support



On 10/07/15 00:33, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> On Tue,  6 Oct 2015 20:17:36 +0300
> Vlad Zolotarov <vladz@...udius-systems.com> wrote:
>
>> Add the ability for underlying device drivers to register the ioctl
>> commands. This is useful when some interaction with the user space
>> beyond sysfs capabilities is required, e.g. query the interrupt mode
>> or bind eventfd to interrupt notifications (similarly to vfio ioctl
>> VFIO_DEVICE_SET_IRQS).
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Vlad Zolotarov <vladz@...udius-systems.com>
> After discussions on and off list, the idea of an ioctl interface
> is just not going to be accepted upstream because it can be abused.
> Therefore another API will be necessary.

I'm open for ideas. So far ioctl seems like the most appropriate 
candidate for the job... ;)

>
> Ps: since I did most of this first,

this particular patch and parts of SET_IRQ code - yes. But that would be 
all. Let's just be specific... ;)
This still doesn't mean that u don't deserve a proper credit for that. 
;) But there was a reason why I didn't do that. See below.
> I am surprised you never gave
> any attribution for the earlier work.

If memory serves me well I asked u about the "attribution" a few days 
ago of the dpdk-dev list but got no answer.
Therefore I took no steps in this regard since it left me under the 
impression that u just didn't want it. However it seems now
that that's not the case... ;)

Pls., let me know if u want me to mention that this patch and SET_IRQ 
ioctl code is based on your patches on dpdk-dev list and if yes, in which
form: just mentioning it in the patch description or putting your 
signed-off to the patch(es).

thanks,
vlad

--
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/