Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Sun, 20 May 2001 23:13:30 +0200 | From | Pavel Machek <> | Subject | Re: [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/
|  |