From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: greg@kroah.com (Greg KH)
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2015 14:57:34 +0100
Subject: UIO Devices and user processes
In-Reply-To: <CAK7rcp_9CxqsEHhTW6Xjyp38ir5KbeRPMYuPQoPYGcrerVWLvQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAK7rcp8Jg6AdJkmTXR+NWWqw6Au7zjAoE796fvubPhzJD5bf-w@mail.gmail.com>
	<20151006052157.GA16343@kroah.com>
	<CAK7rcp_9CxqsEHhTW6Xjyp38ir5KbeRPMYuPQoPYGcrerVWLvQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20151006135734.GA14218@kroah.com>
To: kernelnewbies@lists.kernelnewbies.org
List-Id: kernelnewbies.lists.kernelnewbies.org

On Tue, Oct 06, 2015 at 09:26:23AM -0400, Kenneth Adam Miller wrote:
> No, I didn't try it. I just wanted to ask before I got started. Thanks that
> answers everything.
> 
> Any body know about the issue of assigning a process a region of physical
> memory to use for it's malloc and free? I'd like to just have the process call
> through to a UIO driver with an ioctl, and then once that's done it gets all
> it's memory from a specific region.

UIO drivers do not support ioctl, why would you need/want that?  What's
wrong with just using the correct mmap/munmap logic that UIO userspace
drivers use today?

thanks,

greg k-h