On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 11:56:36AM -0400, David Miller wrote:
> From: Guillaume Nault <g.nault@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 15:57:08 +0200
>
> > I'd rather add
> > + if (cmd == PPPIOCDETACH) {
> > + err = -EINVAL;
> > + goto out;
> > + }
> >
> > Making PPPIOCDETACH unknown to ppp_generic means that the ioctl would
> > be handled by the underlying channel when pf->kind == CHANNEL (see the
> > chan->ops->ioctl() call further down). That shouldn't be a problem per
> > se, but even though PPPIOCDETACH is unsupported, I feel that it should
> > remain a ppp_generic thing. I don't really want its value to be reused
> > for other purposes in the future or have different behaviour depending
> > on the underlying channel.
> >
> > Also PPPIOCDETACH can already fail with -EINVAL. Therefore, if ever
> > there really were programs out there using this call, they'd already
> > have to handle this case. Unconditionally returning -EINVAL would
> > further minimise possibilities for breakage.
>
> I agree.
Okay, I'll do that and leave the ioctl number reserved.
I will add a pr_warn_once() too.
Thanks,
- Eric
