> Maybe Christian's patch can be improved to not do the check on these? > As long as /dev/port exists, it seems reasonable that the kernel should > behave, no matter what I/O ports are accessed from user-space.
nonsense. /dev/mem exists for example, but you are still not supposed to go bang all over the place in it. > > I hate that sensors_detect.. or for that matter any other userland code > > that pokes random ports like that. It should die. > > What do you propose as a replacement? Dunno, something less scary, like knowing where your sensors are on a given machine... honestly, it's just scary the risk you guys are taking by banging random IO ports. At the very least, that shouldn't be done on non-x86. > And how is userland code poking at random ports different from kernel > code poking at random ports? We could move sensors-detect inside the > kernel (and I have some plan to do that) but I fail to see how this > would solve this particular problem. It wouldn't, but at least I could NAK it or make it CONFIG_X86 :-) Ben. _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
