netdev - Re: [Bug 7635] New: ioctl(fd,TCSBRK,1) on socket yields EFAULT, expected EINVAL/ENOTTY

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: <20061208.163349.74721527.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Fri, 08 Dec 2006 16:33:49 -0800 (PST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	shemminger@...l.org
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Bug 7635] New: ioctl(fd,TCSBRK,1) on socket yields EFAULT,
 expected EINVAL/ENOTTY

From: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...l.org>
Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2006 14:00:21 -0800

> That is not true on BSD or other unix standardish ioctl's.
> There are no conflicts between the TIOC... values and the SIOC... values

There is absolutely nothing that we can do about this under
Linux without breaking every single application out there.

We allocated these values a long long time ago, before we
got the idea that we should perhaps use some kind of
macro system (as we mostly do now) to keep the values from
conflicting.

> Seems like one of those annoying standards compliance test
> return value bugs that shouldn't really hit an application.

Being non-compliant, and being unable to become compliant,
it actually a feature and a huge weight off of our shoulders,
don't you think?  :-)
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html