From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755163AbXDZWJJ (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Apr 2007 18:09:09 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755139AbXDZWJJ (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Apr 2007 18:09:09 -0400 Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.179]:62794 "EHLO moutng.kundenserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1031501AbXDZWJH (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Apr 2007 18:09:07 -0400 From: Arnd Bergmann To: Paul Fulghum Subject: Re: compat_ioctl question Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2007 00:08:58 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.6 Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List References: <1177620717.5060.11.camel@amdx2.microgate.com> <200704262337.56240.arnd@arndb.de> <46312AEE.1000302@microgate.com> In-Reply-To: <46312AEE.1000302@microgate.com> X-Face: >j"dOR3XO=^3iw?0`(E1wZ/&le9!.ok[JrI=S~VlsF~}"P\+jx.GT@=?utf-8?q?=0A=09-oaEG?=,9Ba>v;3>:kcw#yO5?B:l{(Ln.2)=?utf-8?q?=27=7Dfw07+4-=26=5E=7CScOpE=3F=5D=5EXdv=5B/zWkA7=60=25M!DxZ=0A=09?= =?utf-8?q?8MJ=2EU5?="hi+2yT(k`PF~Zt;tfT,i,JXf=x@eLP{7B:"GyA\=UnN) =?utf-8?q?=26=26qdaA=3A=7D-Y*=7D=3A3YvzV9=0A=09=7E=273a=7E7I=7CWQ=5D?=<50*%U-6Ewmxfzdn/CK_E/ouMU(r?FAQG/ev^JyuX.%(By`" =?utf-8?q?L=5F=0A=09H=3Dbj?=)"y7*XOqz|SS"mrZ$`Q_syCd MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200704270008.58811.arnd@arndb.de> X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX19fauQJmTGPUN5YLmgRBAP5DYG6+K9PBIHW1BT RZ3sEBycspznyg8ESc/9D0vYjy5Xvb2V3TeXABtvY6E6XUrmXy 1ThIDSgrU6Dggvj9fm3tw== Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Friday 27 April 2007, Paul Fulghum wrote: > Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > It depends a lot on what your specific driver does in the ioctl > > handler, but normally you should define a compat_ioctl() function. > > What driver are you talking about? > > drivers/char/synclink.c > drivers/char/synclinkmp.c > drivers/char/synclink_gt.c > drivers/char/pcmcia/synclink_cs.c > > All use the same set of ioctl() codes that > are peculiar to the synclink drivers. So you are interested in the MGSL_* set of ioctls, right? AFAICS, they are all compatible, with the exception of MGSL_IOCGPARAMS and MGSL_IOCSPARAMS. Fortunately, these two have different ioctl numbers on 64 bit, so you can define a new #define MGSL_IOCSPARAMS32 _IOR(MGSL_MAGIC_IOC,0,struct _MGSL_PARAMS32) #define MGSL_IOCGPARAMS32 _IOR(MGSL_MAGIC_IOC,1,struct _MGSL_PARAMS32) and handle both versions in the ioctl function. > Defining compat_ioctl() seems to be the best way, but > that will require modifying the base tty code to allow > the individual tty drivers to register compat_ioctl(). Yes, that would be the right solution. I've started this some time ago, but never finished it: http://www.uwsg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0511.0/1732.html > Currently the tty file ops do not include that and > tty_io.c does not register a compat_ioctl(), instead > relying on compat_ioctl.h and compat_ioctl.c Just adding the hook in tty_io.c should be trivial, please do that. If you like, you can also move the vt ioctls in order to reduce the size of fs/compat_ioctl.c. Arnd <><