Re: v4l & compat_ioctl

[Andi Kleen]

On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 12:31:33PM +0100, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> On 03/28/2008 12:25 PM, Andi Kleen wrote:
> >However the new standard way to do this is to not 
> >add new stuff into compat_ioctl.c, but define ->compat_ioctl
> >entry points in the low level drivers (and ideally converted
> >them to ->unlocked_ioctl too while you're at it)
> 
> Andi, the problem here is, that v4l has only open in fops which in turn 
> changes fops to the driver's one, so this would mean change all the drivers 
> in v4l...

And?  Are there that many? It's a simple mechanical operation.

> I second the converting to unlocked_ioctl and compat_ioctl in longer term 
> (for new drivers as a merging rule), but wouldn't be feasible to add them 
> to compat ioctl for now?

The problem with compat_ioctl is that it doesn't handle overlapping ioctl
ranges and that the compat code cannot be made modular (although if they
are compatible that is no big problem) 

BTW i haven't audited them, but if there is u64 or similar in there anywhere
be careful about alignment.

-Andi
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/