From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Apr  9 16:17:15 2008
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: arch@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 622171065677
	for <arch@freebsd.org>; Wed,  9 Apr 2008 16:17:15 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com)
Received: from harmony.bsdimp.com (bsdimp.com [199.45.160.85])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24FCF8FC2B
	for <arch@freebsd.org>; Wed,  9 Apr 2008 16:17:15 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by harmony.bsdimp.com (8.14.2/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m39GFY2g077590;
	Wed, 9 Apr 2008 10:15:34 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com)
Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2008 10:16:29 -0600 (MDT)
Message-Id: <20080409.101629.-146244298.imp@bsdimp.com>
To: phk@phk.freebsd.dk
From: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com>
In-Reply-To: <50325.1207757374@critter.freebsd.dk>
References: <18428.59782.318085.53492@gromit.timing.com>
	<50325.1207757374@critter.freebsd.dk>
X-Mailer: Mew version 5.2 on Emacs 21.3 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: arch@freebsd.org, jhein@timing.com
Subject: Re: tt_ioctl 
X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture <freebsd-arch.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2008 16:17:15 -0000

In message: <50325.1207757374@critter.freebsd.dk>
            "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> writes:
: In message <18428.59782.318085.53492@gromit.timing.com>, John E Hein writes:
: 
: >That said... if we do decide to _not_ hook up t_ioctl, then we should
: >just remove it entirely since it's misleading that it's there but not
: >hooked up.
: 
: Well, if we agree that you should use a non-tty device, we may still
: miss the poster child ioctl to make the decision...

I don't think we agreed that should use a non-tty device.  There's
good reasons to allow ioctls passed through to the driver.  There's
historical precedent, and if there's a security concern, the driver
writer can put a suser() call to make sure that things are cool for
mere mortals.

Basically, having another device would be very duplicative in the
driver, and the reasons for it don't make sense to me.

Warner