Re: [PATCH] minor socket ioctl cleanup for 2.5.30

From
Matthew Wilcox <hidden>
Date
2002-08-08 16:07:20
On Thu, Aug 08, 2002 at 08:33:20AM -0700, David S. Miller wrote:
   From: James Morris [off-list ref]
   Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2002 10:24:19 +1000 (EST)

   Suggested by Matthew Wilcox, the patch below consolidates FIOSETOWN etc. 
   ioctl handling into the socket layer, making it common for all sockets.

Do we really want to do this?  What if some socket family either
doesn't want to support it or wants to handle it differently?
I rather think we do.  It's analagous to saying "What if some filesystem
either doesn't want to support it or wants to handle it differently?"
-- tough!  This is unix and filesystems (socket families) support this.

have you read forsyth's paper "Sending UNIX to the Fat Farm"?
http://www.caldo.demon.co.uk/doc/taste.pdf
Section 3.3 is relevant here ... though I think you'll find great
amusement in his other criticisms of solaris.

-- 
Revolutions do not require corporate support.
Thread (2 messages) 2 messages, 2 authors, last reply 2002-08-08
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread / next series-diff position
kprevious message in thread / previous series-diff position
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help