From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261183AbULUCGu (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Dec 2004 21:06:50 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261186AbULUCGu (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Dec 2004 21:06:50 -0500 Received: from viper.oldcity.dca.net ([216.158.38.4]:37056 "HELO viper.oldcity.dca.net") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S261183AbULUCGt (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Dec 2004 21:06:49 -0500 Subject: Re: ioctl assignment strategy? From: Lee Revell To: Alan Cox Cc: Pjotr Kourzanov , LKML In-Reply-To: <1103589129.32548.10.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1103067067.2826.92.camel@chatsworth.hootons.org> <20041215004620.GA15850@kroah.com> <41C04FFA.6010407@nortelnetworks.com> <20041217234854.GA24506@kroah.com> <41C70DF2.80101@nortelnetworks.com> <41C756CA.5080504@xs4all.nl> <1103589129.32548.10.camel@localhost.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 21:06:48 -0500 Message-Id: <1103594808.8297.26.camel@krustophenia.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.0.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2004-12-21 at 00:32 +0000, Alan Cox wrote: > The "ioctls are evil" blind hate department really annoy me however > because like all extreme views the truth very rarely fits their model Another objection was that all ioctls take the BKL. I think you did not hear this one raised as much because it reflected a deficiency in the system. But now at least 2 different solutions have been posted for BKL-less ioctls so that objection is no longer valid. Lee