From owner-freebsd-hackers Wed May 5 12: 2:37 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from dingo.cdrom.com (dingo.cdrom.com [204.216.28.145]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7FC5314E6E for ; Wed, 5 May 1999 12:02:35 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mike@dingo.cdrom.com) Received: from dingo.cdrom.com (localhost.cdrom.com [127.0.0.1]) by dingo.cdrom.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) with ESMTP id MAA01404; Wed, 5 May 1999 12:01:16 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mike@dingo.cdrom.com) Message-Id: <199905051901.MAA01404@dingo.cdrom.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0.2 2/24/98 To: CyberPsychotic Cc: Doug Rabson , freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, tech@openbsd.org Subject: Re: io ports reading/writing In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 05 May 1999 14:01:44 +0500." Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Wed, 05 May 1999 12:01:16 -0700 From: Mike Smith Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > ~ > ~ The access control for io ports is controlled by the file-system > ~ permissions on /dev/io. In a standard setup, only root can access this > ~ device. > ~ > > yes. But I was refering to linux scheme, where you can set the port-range, > so the code wouldn't make any unintentional damage. (like if you're working > with cmos you could only permit 0x70/0x71 ports, so even if code goes nuts, > your disks will be safe). This is basically programmer's problem of course, > but the feature is very handy. Try i386_get_ioperm/i386_set_ioperm -- \\ Sometimes you're ahead, \\ Mike Smith \\ sometimes you're behind. \\ mike@smith.net.au \\ The race is long, and in the \\ msmith@freebsd.org \\ end it's only with yourself. \\ msmith@cdrom.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message