Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 06 Feb 2012 22:57:20 -0500 | From | Adam Jackson <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] char/mem: Make /dev/port less obviously broken (v0) |
| |
On 2/6/12 7:15 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> Who would use this new ioctl? And if it's been working ok until now, > why is it needed?
I'll go out on a limb and say nobody's been seriously using /dev/port. libpciaccess would like to, since it avoids needing iopl, and also avoids duplicating all the kernel's per-arch logic for port access in userspace. But if it's not going to give me the cycle size I asked for I need to fix it before I can use it. Otherwise you get what I'm getting, which is a vesa driver that doesn't work.
Adding the ioctl was just me being polite and assuming that user-kernel ABI was a thing we actually believe in. If it's not, great, let's just fix /dev/port to not be idiotic. If it is, I'd prefer not wasting the memory on another inode.
> If you want something "new" like this, why not just create /dev/ioport > or something like that to always use the proper alignment and not need > an ioctl at all?
If you really want that shed painted a different color, fine.
- ajax
| |