On Fri, 08 Dec 2006 13:36:33 -0800 (PST) David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From: Stephen Hemminger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2006 09:50:55 -0800 > > > ioctl(TCSBRK,1) errno > > pty 0 > > pipe 22/EINVAL > > /dev/null 25/ENOTTY > > reg_file 25/ENOTTY > > socket 14/EFAULT > > If you call a TTY ioctl on a socket, it might not work, don't > you think? > > ioctl values are numbered in the namespace of the object they are > called upon, so an ioctl of value X can mean something different for a > TTY than it does for socket. That is not true on BSD or other unix standardish ioctl's. There are no conflicts between the TIOC... values and the SIOC... values > You're passing a garbage pointer to whatever socket ioctl happens > to be aliased to the same value as TCSBRK on your platform. It's not the garbage pointer. Seems like one of those annoying standards compliance test return value bugs that shouldn't really hit an application. -- Stephen Hemminger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
