[lkml]   [2002]   [Feb]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: SIOCDEVICE ?
    Jeff Garzik <> writes:

    > The correction would perhaps define a real command as needed...

    What about details? You want one ioctl = one command again? I'm confused.

    > > SIOCDEVICE, yes. That's my attempt to create an ioctl interface for
    > > controlling devices. It's defined by the hdlc patch, discussed about
    > > a year (?) ago here. Yes, I think I should post a note here.
    > This too seems way too generic for including in the kernel.
    > What data is passed through the following structure?
    > Untyped data has the same problems as I listed for SIOCDEVPRIVATE:
    > > struct if_settings
    > > {
    > > unsigned int type; /* Type of physical device or protocol */
    > > unsigned int data_length; /* device/protocol data length */
    > > void * data; /* pointer to data, ignored if length = 0 */
    > > };

    It depends on the value of "type", enumerated in include/linux/if.h.
    For example, IF_IFACE_V35 uses sync_serial_settings struct, while
    IF_PROTO_CISCO uses cisco_proto. The structures are defined in
    linux/include/hdlc.h (those related to HDLC protos and sync serial
    interfaces of course).

    The "data_length" is here for protection - as we have to use structs
    of different sizes with different protos etc.

    You may think of this as of a union of structs. I don't like real union
    as its size would be the size of largest struct (large crypto key
    comes to mind).

    > It adds undiscussed networking changed which I very much doubt DaveM
    > would approve of, and I do not approve of: SIOCDEVICE is far too
    > generic for inclusion, and it adds a structure for passing untyped
    > data which is very definitely non-portable.

    I don't see any non-portable things here (what is it exactly?).

    I don't say this is ideal, the requirement of middle ifreq structure
    (required by netdev ioctls) isn't the most elegant.

    About discussions: last discussion I remember ended with:

    u16 media_group;
    struct hdlc_physical ...
    struct hdlc_bitstream
    struct hdlc_protocol
    struct fr_protocol
    struct eth_physical
    struct atm_physical
    struct dsl_physical
    struct dsl_bitstream
    struct tr_physical
    struct wireless_physical
    struct wireless_80211
    struct wireless_auth
    } config;
    (see a thread with message dated 7 Dec 2000 by Alan Cox
    (Message-ID <>). I think there was
    no serious objections, and the SIOCDEVICE is just that, with the union
    replaced by individual structs (to save memory and permit future extensions
    without breaking binary compatibility), and the whole thing moved to ifreq
    to avoid 3rd level of indirection.

    From my point of view, the following ifreq would be better (sort of):

    struct ifreq
    char ifrn_name[IFNAMSIZ]; /* if name, e.g. "en0" */
    unsigned int type; /* or media_group */
    variable_size_struct defined_by_type;/* not a pointer but real struct*/

    i.e. something like sockaddr structures. I don't even hope anyone would
    accept it.
    Krzysztof Halasa
    Network Administrator
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:23    [W:0.029 / U:0.948 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site