From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+w=401wt.eu-S1762527AbZJOJWB@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1762527AbZJOJWB (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Thu, 15 Oct 2009 05:22:01 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1760013AbZJOJWB
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing>);
	Thu, 15 Oct 2009 05:22:01 -0400
Received: from www.tglx.de ([62.245.132.106]:49825 "EHLO www.tglx.de"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1754917AbZJOJWA (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 15 Oct 2009 05:22:00 -0400
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2009 11:20:55 +0200 (CEST)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
cc: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
       Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
       Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
Subject: [RFC] Remove or convert empty ioctls ?
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.0910151113340.9428@localhost.localdomain>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (LFD 1167 2008-08-23)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

Hi,

while looking into pushing down BKL to ioctls I noticed that we have a
lot of ioctls which simply return -EINVAL or some other fancy error
code.

The question is whether we should convert them to unlocked_ioctl or
simply remove them and let the sys_ioctl code return the default
-ENOTTY error code.

One could argue that this is a user visible change, but OTOH there is
no particular value of EINVAL or any other weird error code when it
just says: there is no ioctl for this fd.

Thanks,

	tglx