From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 21 May 2001 16:22:36 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 21 May 2001 16:22:28 -0400 Received: from cisco7500-mainGW.gts.cz ([194.213.32.131]:59396 "EHLO bug.ucw.cz") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 21 May 2001 16:22:11 -0400 Message-ID: <20010520231330.E2647@bug.ucw.cz> Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 23:13:30 +0200 From: Pavel Machek To: Richard Gooch , Alexander Viro Cc: Matthew Wilcox , Alan Cox , Andrew Clausen , Ben LaHaise , torvalds@transmeta.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFD w/info-PATCH] device arguments from lookup, partion code In-Reply-To: <200105200222.f4K2Mto02608@mobilix.ras.ucalgary.ca> <200105200251.f4K2pHT02925@mobilix.ras.ucalgary.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.93i In-Reply-To: <200105200251.f4K2pHT02925@mobilix.ras.ucalgary.ca>; from Richard Gooch on Sat, May 19, 2001 at 10:51:17PM -0400 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi! > > > The transaction(2) syscall can be just as easily abused as ioctl(2) in > > > this respect. People can pass pointers to ill-designed structures very > > > > Right. Moreover, it's not needed. The same functionality can be > > trivially implemented by write() and read(). As the matter of fact, > > had been done in userland context for decades. Go and buy > > Stevens. Read it. Then come back. > > I don't need to read it. Don't be insulting. Sure, you *can* use a > write(2)/read(2) cycle. But that's two syscalls compared to one with > ioctl(2) or transaction(2). That can matter to some applications. I just don't think so. Where did you see performance-critical use of ioctl()? Pavel -- I'm pavel@ucw.cz. "In my country we have almost anarchy and I don't care." Panos Katsaloulis describing me w.r.t. patents at discuss@linmodems.org