From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Apr 29 20:28:38 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F05C106566C; Thu, 29 Apr 2010 20:28:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from czerner.lukas@gmail.com) Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com (fg-out-1718.google.com [72.14.220.153]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 208C58FC19; Thu, 29 Apr 2010 20:28:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id l26so2060614fgb.13 for ; Thu, 29 Apr 2010 13:28:28 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:date:from:x-x-sender:to:cc :subject:in-reply-to:message-id:references:user-agent:mime-version :content-type; bh=uIWEFG9KgSyPlZnIMoXEd7lh5705fWYVF1e9a9V3kRg=; b=snb5C8YQzKdxylidq3xL89IWvoBmSTZINRhNFWPTWbHX5mAmJgoiBKlzuaCL8hY2hJ KyCG3aKmJVT5B73M3FWXAKAA8D8dGFndjZ/84Dnosx9lWreR3nYYPXMJfMUat3AcbUUI HSUmB+SmZ+7DwfQECrYfk778Ge/i5HJnmBnzc= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:x-x-sender:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:message-id :references:user-agent:mime-version:content-type; b=dnK0av7gmsnBZh75321Cgbx0y/Fte53XaWNvxJreOoSlubjeeKQHhEQxiG0vs0HOMc CCFAGUOb7RMjr5yXsgonqs7RdIlmrphImH0PR+VjbaNkXpJphqeB/ccc1/IbR9gRovr/ E/pzPWY6shMMI8b1tomw5TthmgUpR7VzvQcYg= Received: by 10.87.58.6 with SMTP id l6mr497928fgk.15.1272572908587; Thu, 29 Apr 2010 13:28:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from a04-0215a.kn.vutbr.cz (a04-0215a.kn.vutbr.cz [147.229.216.20]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id e3sm3172212fga.14.2010.04.29.13.28.27 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Thu, 29 Apr 2010 13:28:27 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2010 22:28:31 +0200 (CEST) From: "=?ISO-8859-15?Q?Luk=E1=A8_Czerner?=" X-X-Sender: bratt@a04-0215a.kn.vutbr.cz To: John Baldwin In-Reply-To: <201004291606.35899.jhb@freebsd.org> Message-ID: References: <201004291418.09768.jhb@freebsd.org> <201004291606.35899.jhb@freebsd.org> User-Agent: Alpine 1.10 (DEB 962 2008-03-14) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: MULTIPART/MIXED; BOUNDARY="8323329-226625673-1272572912=:30007" Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Luk=E1=A8_Czerner?= Subject: Re: ioctl, copy string from user X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2010 20:28:38 -0000 This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. --8323329-226625673-1272572912=:30007 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=iso-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT On Thu, 29 Apr 2010, John Baldwin wrote: > > > > > > On Thursday 29 April 2010 1:52:45 pm LukᨠCzerner wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > I know that there are plenty of examples in the kernel code, but I > > > > just can not get it working, so maybe I am doing some stupid mistake > > > > I am not aware of. Please give me a hint if you can. > > > > > > > > What I want to do is simply call the ioctl from the userspace with > > > > (char *) argument. Then, in kernel ioctl handling function copy the > > > > string argument into the kernel space. I have tried it various ways, > > > > everything without any success. > > > > > > > > *** Userspace *** > > > > char name[MAXLEN]; > > > > > > > > strncpy(name, argv[1], MAXLEN); > > > > fprintf(stdout,"Name: %s\n",name); > > > > > > > > if (ioctl(fd, MYIOCTL, name)) { > > > > > > On BSD systems, ioctl() copies the data into the kernel for you ahead of > time. > > > What does the definition of MYIOCTL look like? > > > > #define MYIOCTL _IOW('M', 0, char *) > > Ok. In that case the argument to ioctl needs to be a pointer to a char *, > not the raw char * itself. Try doing 'ioctl(fd, MYIOCTL, &name)' from > userland to see if that fixes it. I have already tried that, but still without any success. The buffer remains unchanged (which is weird IMO). Just FYI I am using FreeBSD-8. > > > > > And the second question. I have commented that I can allocate buffer > > > > dynamically, but I suppose that there will be some locks involved so > > > > I think I can not just use M_WAITOK, am I right ? > > > > > > malloc() and free() acquire their own locks internally, you do not need to > > > hold any locks to call them. > > > > I probably does not express what I meant very clearly. My concern is > > that when I am calling malloc with M_WAITOK I can sleep (be > > rescheduled) and it may be bad thing if I am holding some lock, > > because I can block others, am I right ? > > Generally yes, but it depends on the lock. If it is the vn_lock lock then it > is ok to do a blocking malloc(). As a general rule I do try to call malloc() > before acquiring locks (basically preallocating) whenever possible. So I suppose M_NOWAIT will do the trick when there is no other way (preallocations etc..) ? Of course I should test if it does not return NULL then. Thanks. --8323329-226625673-1272572912=:30007--