Subject: Re: Functional VOP_IOCTL
To: Konrad Schroder <email@example.com>
From: Frank van der Linden <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 02/23/2003 14:33:07
On Thu, Feb 20, 2003 at 03:52:42PM -0800, Konrad Schroder wrote:
> One of the things I'd like to do with LFS is to make the system calls into
> ioctl calls, which in theory should let LFS be loaded as an LKM. No other
> filesystem (except fifofs and specfs) has VOP_IOCTL defined as anything
> other than a stub, though, and I find that even if it is defined the ioctl
> still returns with EPASSTHROUGH.
> Would anyone object if I let ioctls to VREG and VDIR fall through to the
> VOP_IOCTL case?
That's fine with me, as Jason said, that functionality can be used
in other ways as well.
Btw, how do you plan to use VOP_IOCTL here? Most lfs systems calls
take an fsid, and if you want to end up in a newly created lfs_ioctl,
you'd need an actual LFS vnode from an open file on an LFS filesystem,
not the device itself.