Re: dev_t / udev_t confusion ?

From: Poul-Henning Kamp (phk_at_phk.freebsd.dk)
Date: 06/09/04

  • Next message: Doug White: "Re: NTP import coming question: location of crypto keys for ntpd" 
    To: Scott Long <scottl@freebsd.org>
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2004 19:25:41 +0200

    In message <40C742A0.5090704@freebsd.org>, Scott Long writes:

    >> cdevsw->ioctl() takes a caddr_t pointer argument which
    >> really should be a void *, do we want to change that
    >> as well (since it is all the same files we'll have to
    >> change).
    >>
    >
    >Is this going to have any consequences on COMPAT_LINUX code or anything
    >else that calls ioctl() through obscure means?

    Well, it has more impact for the places which implement the ioctl,
    in particular if they do pointer arithmetic on the pointer (legal
    on caddr_t but illegal on void *). 

    -- 
Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
_______________________________________________
freebsd-arch@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arch-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
  • Next message: Doug White: "Re: NTP import coming question: location of crypto keys for ntpd"