Re: [PATCH] minor socket ioctl cleanup for 2.5.30

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.

Hello!

quoted

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.

No, this is not true. This creepy ioctl is specific to TCP
(well, x.25 also uses SIGURG), which use kill*(sk->proc, SIGURG) directly.

Probably, it is better to move sk->proc to TCP private data,
this ioctl to tcp_ioctl(). Or... find a way to get rid of this completely,
not breaking compatibility with a few BSDish applications.

Alexey