Am So., 18. Aug. 2019 um 21:32 Uhr schrieb Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx>:
> On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 7:32 PM Andreas Gruenbacher <agruenba@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 10:45 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > + /* These are just misnamed, they actually get/put from/to user an int */
> > > + switch(cmd) {
> > > + case FS_IOC32_GETFLAGS:
> > > + cmd = FS_IOC_GETFLAGS;
> > > + break;
> > > + case FS_IOC32_SETFLAGS:
> > > + cmd = FS_IOC_SETFLAGS;
> > > + break;
> >
> > I'd like the code to be more explicit here:
> >
> > case FITRIM:
> > case FS_IOC_GETFSLABEL:
> > break;
> > default:
> > return -ENOIOCTLCMD;
>
> I've looked at it again: if we do this, the function actually becomes
> longer than the native gfs2_ioctl(). Should we just make a full copy then?
I don't think the length of gfs2_compat_ioctl is really an issue as
long as the function is that simple.
> static long gfs2_compat_ioctl(struct file *filp, unsigned int cmd,
> unsigned long arg)
> {
> switch(cmd) {
> case FS_IOC32_GETFLAGS:
> return gfs2_get_flags(filp, (u32 __user *)arg);
> case FS_IOC32_SETFLAGS:
> return gfs2_set_flags(filp, (u32 __user *)arg);
> case FITRIM:
> return gfs2_fitrim(filp, (void __user *)arg);
> case FS_IOC_GETFSLABEL:
> return gfs2_getlabel(filp, (char __user *)arg);
> }
>
> return -ENOTTY;
> }
Don't we still need the compat_ptr conversion? That seems to be the
main point of having a compat_ioctl operation.
> > Should we feed this through the gfs2 tree?
>
> A later patch that removes the FITRIM handling from fs/compat_ioctl.c
> depends on it, so I'd like to keep everything together.
Ok, fine for me.
Thanks,
Andreas
