On Thu, 2022-04-28 at 12:28 +0200, Oliver Neukum wrote: > > > On 26.04.22 12:37, Bastien Nocera wrote: > > > > I don't think anyone wants to implement path based syscalls, > > and again, > > it's equivalent to remote closing the fd, not to disabling the > > access > > to the device: > > "If the file is a special file for a device which is open, the > > device > > close function is called as if all open references to the file had > > been > > closed." > OK, so do we still have a need to discuss this specifically to usbfs? > I suppose if you put this into VFS, you will need a hook to map the > syscall to drivers that need to handling ioctl() having effects > beyond > their syscall abstractly speaking. I'm afraid that I don't have any intentions on working on this feature at the vfs level. As I already mentioned, I think that the semantics are too different to make sense at that level. I'm instead investigating having an ioctl-less BPF interface, with the help of Benjamin and Peter.
