Re: [PATCH] Adds a new ioctl32 syscall for backwards compatibility layers
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Date: 2021-01-16 09:08:23
Also in:
linux-api, linux-arm-kernel, linux-fsdevel, linux-s390, lkml
Possibly related (same subject, not in this thread)
- 2021-01-15 · Re: [PATCH] Adds a new ioctl32 syscall for backwards compatibility layers · Rich Felker <dalias@libc.org>
- 2021-01-15 · RE: [PATCH] Adds a new ioctl32 syscall for backwards compatibility layers · David Laight <hidden>
- 2021-01-15 · Re: [PATCH] Adds a new ioctl32 syscall for backwards compatibility layers · Arnd Bergmann <arnd@kernel.org>
- 2021-01-15 · RE: [PATCH] Adds a new ioctl32 syscall for backwards compatibility layers · David Laight <hidden>
- 2021-01-15 · [PATCH] Adds a new ioctl32 syscall for backwards compatibility layers · <hidden>
On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 04:07:46PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
Finally, I'm not convinced that this patch works correctly. We have in_compat_syscall(), and code that uses it may well be reachable from ioctl.
ioctls are the prime user of in_compat_syscall().
I personally would like to see in_compat_syscall() go away, but some other people (Hi, Christoph!) disagree, and usage seems to be increasing, not decreasing.
I'm absolutely against it going away. in_compat_syscall helped to remove so much crap compared to the explicit compat syscalls.