I'm involved in the construction of a Linux based device that needs to
use ioctl's to communicate between its kernel module and its daemons.
The device is an embedded product. We should never have any need to
distribute this driver interface.
I would like to use an ioctl range that would be safe, now and in the
future. Given that we won't be putting this driver on any general
computing platforms, it seems inappropriate to reserve an ioctl range
for this device.
I would really like to use an ioctl range that is reserved for the class
of private embedded devices. That way, I could be sure that I would
never conflict with any peripheral that we might use without a
reservation specific to our device.
Would you consider reserving space for such ioctl's?
p.s. I am not a kernel developer and hence not a member of this mailing
list. Please cc me on any replies.
p.p.s. I first sent this request to Michael Chastain, who remains listed
in Documentation/ioctl-number.txt. He replied that he is no longer
involved and referred me to this e-mail list. Perhaps that document
should be updated.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]