[PATCH] tty: fix vt_compat_ioctl

[PATCH] tty: fix vt_compat_ioctl

[Andreas Schwab]

Call compat_unimap_ioctl, not do_unimap_ioctl.

Signed-off-by: Andreas Schwab <schwab@linux-m68k.org>
---
 drivers/char/vt_ioctl.c |    2 +-
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/char/vt_ioctl.c b/drivers/char/vt_ioctl.c
index 29c651a..431c5c3 100644
--- a/drivers/char/vt_ioctl.c
+++ b/drivers/char/vt_ioctl.c
@@ -1530,7 +1530,7 @@ long vt_compat_ioctl(struct tty_struct *tty, struct file * file,
 
 	case PIO_UNIMAP:
 	case GIO_UNIMAP:
-		ret = do_unimap_ioctl(cmd, up, perm, vc);
+		ret = compat_unimap_ioctl(cmd, up, perm, vc);
 		break;
 
 	/*
-- 
1.6.4.4

-- 
Andreas Schwab, schwab@linux-m68k.org
GPG Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756  01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
"And now for something completely different."

Re: [PATCH] tty: fix vt_compat_ioctl

[Greg KH]

On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 08:10:02PM +0200, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> Call compat_unimap_ioctl, not do_unimap_ioctl.

That's a nice description of what the patch does, but why do we need to
do that?  What is the problem here?  What caused it?

thanks,

greg k-h

Re: [PATCH] tty: fix vt_compat_ioctl

[Andreas Schwab]

Greg KH <gregkh@suse.de> writes:

> On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 08:10:02PM +0200, Andreas Schwab wrote:
>> Call compat_unimap_ioctl, not do_unimap_ioctl.
>
> That's a nice description of what the patch does, but why do we need to
> do that?

It's a compat ioctl handler, so lets call the compat ioctl handler.

Andreas.

-- 
Andreas Schwab, schwab@linux-m68k.org
GPG Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756  01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
"And now for something completely different."

Re: [PATCH] tty: fix vt_compat_ioctl

[Florian Mickler]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 900 bytes --]

Hi!

On Mon, 28 Sep 2009 21:21:14 +0200
Andreas Schwab <schwab@linux-m68k.org> wrote:

> Greg KH <gregkh@suse.de> writes:
> 
> > On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 08:10:02PM +0200, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> >> Call compat_unimap_ioctl, not do_unimap_ioctl.
> >
> > That's a nice description of what the patch does, but why do we need to
> > do that?
> 
> It's a compat ioctl handler, so lets call the compat ioctl handler.
> 
> Andreas.
> 

Any other reasons? Why not rename the call then? That would be a
functional no-op with the same effect... 


Sincerely,
Florian

p.s. maybe it is obvious if one looks at the code (i didnt), but it
should be described nonetheless in the commit-log!

-- 
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
> Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?  
>> A: Top-posting.  
>>> Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH] tty: fix vt_compat_ioctl

[Arnd Bergmann]

On Monday 28 September 2009, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> Greg KH <gregkh@suse.de> writes:
> 
> > On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 08:10:02PM +0200, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> >> Call compat_unimap_ioctl, not do_unimap_ioctl.
> >
> > That's a nice description of what the patch does, but why do we need to
> > do that?
> 
> It's a compat ioctl handler, so lets call the compat ioctl handler.
> 

My bad, sorry.

I broke it in e9216651 evidently, thanks for debugging this.

The compat_unimap_ioctl was originally called do_unimap_ioctl in
fs/compat_ioctl.h which got moved to drivers/char/vt_ioctl.c.
In that patch, the caller was not updated and consequently called
the native handler.

Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>

	Arnd <><