Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2008 10:18:16 -0600 (MDT) From: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> To: jhein@timing.com Cc: arch@FreeBSD.org, phk@phk.freebsd.dk Subject: Re: tt_ioctl Message-ID: <20080409.101816.1824031653.imp@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: <18428.59782.318085.53492@gromit.timing.com> References: <40914.1207681578@critter.freebsd.dk> <20080409.044228.-201314267.imp@bsdimp.com> <18428.59782.318085.53492@gromit.timing.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message: <18428.59782.318085.53492@gromit.timing.com>
John E Hein <jhein@timing.com> writes:
: M. Warner Losh wrote at 04:42 -0600 on Apr 9, 2008:
: > I think I may have originally added the code that John proposed to the
: > tsc tree (or maybe just my private tree when I was investigating the
: > problem for others at TSC).
:
: It wasn't checked in the local tree - I guess we came up with it
: independently (assume you're talking about hooking up t_ioctl?).
Yes. I almost just quietly committed it to FreeBSD at the time, but I
got busy on another project and never got back to it. Maybe I should
have just done it and saw if phk noticed :-)
: > I think it is the right way to go, and that the ioctl vs security
: > argument is a bit specious.
:
: Well, I could go either way on this issue - 'specious' might be a bit
: too strong. I could see issues with pass-through device-specific
: ioctls on tty devs - especially due to the fact that it's a tty device
: is somewhat obscured in the case of ucom children.
I'm not sure I follow what you are saying here...
Warner
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080409.101816.1824031653.imp>