lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [May]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFD w/info-PATCH] device arguments from lookup, partion code
Hi!

> > > The transaction(2) syscall can be just as easily abused as ioctl(2) in
> > > this respect. People can pass pointers to ill-designed structures very
> >
> > Right. Moreover, it's not needed. The same functionality can be
> > trivially implemented by write() and read(). As the matter of fact,
> > had been done in userland context for decades. Go and buy
> > Stevens. Read it. Then come back.
>
> I don't need to read it. Don't be insulting. Sure, you *can* use a
> write(2)/read(2) cycle. But that's two syscalls compared to one with
> ioctl(2) or transaction(2). That can matter to some applications.

I just don't think so. Where did you see performance-critical use of
ioctl()?
Pavel
--
I'm pavel@ucw.cz. "In my country we have almost anarchy and I don't care."
Panos Katsaloulis describing me w.r.t. patents at discuss@linmodems.org
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:53    [W:0.172 / U:1.368 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site