On Fri, Jan 04, 2008 at 07:27:05PM +0100, Matthias Drochner wrote:

> 
> yamt@NetBSD.org said:
> > Log Message: test i386_get_ioperm/i386_set_ioperm. 
> 
> This reminds me of something: Because this syscall is
> practically useless and the bitmap just uses up pcb bits
> and kernel stack, I had once reduced it to a COMPAT
> option, setting iopl if any access is allowed by the
> bitmap, somewhere in a local tree, before the i386/amd64
> unification.
> This would make that the (faked) bitmap returned by
> get_ioperm() would not necessarily be identical to the one
> sent by set_ioperm(). I didn't find any userland program
> using the ioperm calls, let alone reading back the bitmasks.
> So how about getting the bitmask removed?

I think we should get rid of it the bitmap and adjust the iopl. I can't
think of any good reason to provide the interface. It did have users the
last time I looked, try Google codesearch.

Andrew