Subject: Re: Functional VOP_IOCTL
To: Konrad Schroder <>
From: Bill Studenmund <>
List: tech-kern
Date: 02/24/2003 10:19:31
On Thu, 20 Feb 2003, 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?

While I don't think I mind this change, use an fcntl instead. We added
VOP_FCNTL for this type of thing - operations that have more to do with
the file system of the vnode than the contents of the vnode. When we add
ACL support, we need to start using fcntls, so we might as well get used
to it now. :-)

Take care,