From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753304AbZI2P4a (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Sep 2009 11:56:30 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752830AbZI2P4a (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Sep 2009 11:56:30 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:56820 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751901AbZI2P43 (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Sep 2009 11:56:29 -0400 Organization: Red Hat UK Ltd. Registered Address: Red Hat UK Ltd, Amberley Place, 107-111 Peascod Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SI4 1TE, United Kingdom. Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No. 3798903 From: David Howells In-Reply-To: References: <20090928135332.4300.56046.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk> <20090928151628.62955233@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> To: Linus Torvalds Cc: dhowells@redhat.com, Alan Cox , akpm@linux-foundation.org, gregkh@suse.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Remove pty_ops_bsd and pty_bsd_ioctl() as they're not used Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2009 16:55:45 +0100 Message-ID: <395.1254239745@redhat.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Linus Torvalds wrote: > > pty_slave_driver->owner = THIS_MODULE; > pty_slave_driver->driver_name = "pty_slave"; > @@ -399,7 +387,7 @@ static void __init legacy_pty_init(void) > pty_slave_driver->flags = TTY_DRIVER_RESET_TERMIOS | > TTY_DRIVER_REAL_RAW; > pty_slave_driver->other = pty_driver; > - tty_set_operations(pty_slave_driver, &pty_ops); > + tty_set_operations(pty_slave_driver, &pty_ops_bsd); > > if (tty_register_driver(pty_driver)) > panic("Couldn't register pty driver"); > Is it right to use pty_ops_bsd in _both_ places? Looking at the code in linux-2.6.0, the BSD ioctl only applies to the master and doesn't apply to the slave. David