Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 10:01:38 -0500 From: Brooks Davis <brooks@freebsd.org> To: Yar Tikhiy <yar@comp.chem.msu.su> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Generic ioctl and ether_ioctl don't agree Message-ID: <20070314150138.GC56444@lor.one-eyed-alien.net> In-Reply-To: <20070314102023.GB1766@comp.chem.msu.su> References: <20070314102023.GB1766@comp.chem.msu.su>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--WplhKdTI2c8ulnbP Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Mar 14, 2007 at 01:20:23PM +0300, Yar Tikhiy wrote: > Hi folks, >=20 > Quite a while ago I noticed that our ioctl handlers get the ioctl > command via u_long, but ether_ioctl()'s command argument is int. > This disarray dates back to 1998, when ioctl functions started to > take u_long as the command, but ether_ioctl() was never fixed. > Fortunately, our ioctl command coding still fits in 32 bits, or > else we would've got problems on 64-bit arch'es already. I'd like > to fix this long-standing bug some day after RELENG_7 is branched. > Of course, this will break ABI to network modules on all 64-bit > arch'es. BTW, the same applies to other L2 layers, such as firewire, > which seems to have been cloned from if_ethersubr.c. >=20 > Any objections or comments? Thanks! Why wait? We're allowed to break module ABIs in current at any time and there's no chance modules built on RELENG_6 will work on RELENG_7 trees anyway. -- Brooks --WplhKdTI2c8ulnbP Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFF+A5SXY6L6fI4GtQRAllSAJ46pjNPXUmgW75ecpgONqRNdpBKHQCgqbBf cL6E8d7By1TIU8h3sfgyvzk= =sbzp -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --WplhKdTI2c8ulnbP--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070314150138.GC56444>