Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2011 00:06:18 +0100 From: Giovanni Trematerra <gianni@freebsd.org> To: Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org> Cc: Garrett Cooper <yanegomi@gmail.com>, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: deprecated TIOCSPGRP and TIOCGPGRP ioctl command Message-ID: <CACfq093r9%2BFjAM5cOTJy=_f8_73qw-0x5GrSt3VYRg=B03UfsA@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CAGE5yCqSfJuemRgT7agTsydbBAJSrnAbyyoP3h%2BJ-JJMd1OAMw@mail.gmail.com> References: <CACfq09210zdar=%2BM40gLoVtZnwLda88T1FJBbLXiy9e3t8-9NQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAGE5yCor9c%2Bb7hZaF8NLdxc2F8PPfi0kTZFLXY5nvA%2Bbm1Ytuw@mail.gmail.com> <D2F25708-5E0B-4270-83F0-79286C5A581A@gmail.com> <CAGE5yCqSfJuemRgT7agTsydbBAJSrnAbyyoP3h%2BJ-JJMd1OAMw@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 8:18 PM, Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 5:52 PM, Garrett Cooper <yanegomi@gmail.com> wrote=
:
>> On Nov 9, 2011, at 4:49 PM, Peter Wemm wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 3:39 PM, Giovanni Trematerra <gianni@freebsd.org=
> wrote:
>>>> Are they deprecated enough to be removed, now?
>>>> FYI FIFO doesn't support them.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Gianni
>>>>
>>>> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>>>> --- sys/kern/sys_pipe.c (revision 227233)
>>>> +++ sys/kern/sys_pipe.c (working copy)
>>>> @@ -1304,17 +1304,6 @@ pipe_ioctl(fp, cmd, data, active_cred, td)
>>>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0*(int *)data =3D fgetown(&mpipe->pipe_sigio);
>>>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0break;
>>>>
>>>> - =A0 /* This is deprecated, FIOSETOWN should be used instead. */
>>>> - =A0 case TIOCSPGRP:
>>>> - =A0 =A0 =A0 PIPE_UNLOCK(mpipe);
>>>> - =A0 =A0 =A0 error =3D fsetown(-(*(int *)data), &mpipe->pipe_sigio);
>>>> - =A0 =A0 =A0 goto out_unlocked;
>>>> -
>>>> - =A0 /* This is deprecated, FIOGETOWN should be used instead. */
>>>> - =A0 case TIOCGPGRP:
>>>> - =A0 =A0 =A0 *(int *)data =3D -fgetown(&mpipe->pipe_sigio);
>>>> - =A0 =A0 =A0 break;
>>>> -
>>>> =A0 =A0default:
>>>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0error =3D ENOTTY;
>>>
>>> Be very very careful with this. =A0It's part of the classic BSD job
>>> control API. =A0It would be wise to survey whether any ports shells use
>>> this.
>>>
>>> You might also want to consider things like this in libc:
>>> int
>>> tcsetpgrp(int fd, pid_t pgrp)
>>> {
>>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0int s;
>>>
>>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0s =3D pgrp;
>>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0return (_ioctl(fd, TIOCSPGRP, &s));
>>> }
>>> Our own libc code uses this, albeit on an API intended to be used on a =
tty.
>>>
>>> The shell I'd be most concerned about is csh/tcsh in our tree. It has
>>> quite an #ifdef legacy layer and I couldn't convince myself it wasn't
>>> using this indirectly (or the tc* functions) on pipes.
>>>
>>> It might also be an idea to see if the linux compat layer can be
>>> switched over to using the newer API.
>>
>> Move to a compat library perhaps?
>> -Garrett
>
> It's not a compat library candidate.
>
> Summary of the issue:
> ioctl(fd, TIOCSPGRP, arg) can be used on sockets, pipes, ttys. =A0But not=
fifos.
> this is a classic BSD job control API.
> libc itself uses this internally on ttys.
> libc doesn't check that the function that does this is actually a tty,
> it could be being used by shells and pipes as an obscure side effect.
> The API is equivalent to FIOSETOWN etc and sockets and pipes use
> common code to implement both ioctl() calls.
>
> The proposed patch was to remove the TIOCSPGRP -> FIOSETOWN mapping
> for pipes only, to sync them with fifos. =A0ttys and sockets would be
> unaffected.
>
> The implementation function still has to stay. =A0Its not a large chunk
> of obsolete code that goes away, its just the mapping between the
> ioctl number and the implementation.
>
Thank you Peter, just last question on this.
Having just one ioctl function for both pipe and fifo, would be a problem
having TIOCSPGRP and TIOCGPGRP implemented for fifo?
--
Gianni
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CACfq093r9%2BFjAM5cOTJy=_f8_73qw-0x5GrSt3VYRg=B03UfsA>