On Wednesday, 24 January 2024 01:38:52 CST Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 24, 2024, at 01:40, Elizabeth Figura wrote:
> > ntsync uses a misc device as the simplest and least intrusive uAPI interface.
> >
> > Each file description on the device represents an isolated NT instance, intended
> > to correspond to a single NT virtual machine.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Elizabeth Figura <zfigura@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> I'm looking at the ioctl interface to ensure it's well-formed.
>
> Your patches look ok from that perspective, but there are a
> few minor things I would check for consistency here:
>
> > +
> > +static const struct file_operations ntsync_fops = {
> > + .owner = THIS_MODULE,
> > + .open = ntsync_char_open,
> > + .release = ntsync_char_release,
> > + .unlocked_ioctl = ntsync_char_ioctl,
> > + .compat_ioctl = ntsync_char_ioctl,
> > + .llseek = no_llseek,
> > +};
>
> The .compat_ioctl pointer should point to compat_ptr_ioctl()
> since the actual ioctl commands all take pointers instead
> of interpreting the argument as a number.
>
> On x86 and arm64 this won't make a difference as compat_ptr()
> is a nop.
Thanks; will fix.
