[lkml]   [2002]   [Mar]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: bitkeeper / IDE cleanup
Alan Cox wrote:
>>3. Why do we have something like genric cdrom ioctl handling layer,
>> which is basically just adding the above hooks?
> That bit is needed. You want unpriviledged processes to issue a subset of
> the available commands so users can do things like play music. Those ioctls
> for CDROM are also rather important for back compatibility.
> Thats a seperate but important case.
> There are two things I think you must consider
> #1 "Make the simple things easy" - abstract common cd interface and
> friends. Unpriviledged but with strict limits on what can be issued
> #2 "Make the hard possible" - the direct "I know what I am doing"
> CAP_SYS_RAWIO interface
> #3 Ioctls that must be issued with kernel help because they change
> interface status and must synchronize both the device and the
> controller (eg 'go to UDMA3')
> What can hopefully go is ioctls that are complex, setuid required and
> could be done by #2.

Amen. I was of course not arguing against the cdrom abstraction layer.

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 13:24    [W:0.050 / U:1.492 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site