[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190417064629.GA19549@kroah.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2019 08:46:29 +0200
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>
Cc: Fuqian Huang <huangfq.daxian@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] tty: rocket: Remove the rp_ioctl
On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 08:27:41AM +0200, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> On 16. 04. 19, 16:53, Fuqian Huang wrote:
> > --- a/drivers/tty/rocket.c
> > +++ b/drivers/tty/rocket.c
> ...
> > -/* IOCTL call handler into the driver */
> > -static int rp_ioctl(struct tty_struct *tty,
> > - unsigned int cmd, unsigned long arg)
> > -{
> > - struct r_port *info = tty->driver_data;
> > - void __user *argp = (void __user *)arg;
> > - int ret = 0;
> > -
> > - if (cmd != RCKP_GET_PORTS && rocket_paranoia_check(info, "rp_ioctl"))
> > - return -ENXIO;
> > -
> > - switch (cmd) {
> > - case RCKP_GET_STRUCT:
> > - if (copy_to_user(argp, info, sizeof (struct r_port)))
> > - ret = -EFAULT;
> > - break;
>
> I am not sure what Greg meant, but I had only this particular ioctl on
> mind when I was writing about removal. The other ones might be used _in
> theory_. Even though they are not exposed to userspace either. So if
> they are not source of potential issues, I would keep them:
I was just meaning that one specific ioctl, not the whole thing.
Although dropping all of these custom ioctls is probably the right thing
to do in the long-run, for now, let's just get rid of the problem one.
thanks,
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists