On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 00:18:08 +0100 (CET)
Michael Tautschnig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So the preferred behaviour would be: Add an interface-specification to
> l2tpns' config - or will the above "patch" ever be included in the
> official kernel?
I put the patch into my tree just now, I'll pus
[...]
So add "case TUNSETIFF" to the switch statement above.
You discovered the fix for your own bug, so why not implement
it and submit the resulting patch here? :-)
It might have been intentionally left out - but here we go:
--- linux-2.6.10/fs/compat_ioctl.c 2005-02-15 00:09:53.969591354 +0
On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 23:59:32 +0100 (CET)
Michael Tautschnig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> switch (cmd) {
> case SIOCGIFFLAGS:
> case SIOCGIFMETRIC:
> case SIOCGIFMTU:
> case SIOCGIFMEM:
> case SIOCGIFHWADDR:
> case SIOCGIFINDEX:
> case SIOCGIFADDR:
> case
Take a look at the dev_ifsioc() function in ioctl32.c-- it does not
copy the data back to userspace except for SIOCSIFMAP, and judging
from the strict definition of TUNSETIFF it should not be required to
do so.
IMHO this isn't true -
switch (cmd) {
case SIOCGIFFLAGS:
case SIOCGIFMETRIC:
Take a look at the dev_ifsioc() function in ioctl32.c-- it does not
copy the data back to userspace except for SIOCSIFMAP, and judging
from the strict definition of TUNSETIFF it should not be required to
do so.
I think if this is functionality that is required (I see no TUNGETIFF,
but I don't play
Hello!
Thanks for the information regarding userland/kernelspace - I think I
understood ...
The reason of my question were problems using the tun/tap interface - I've
got an application (namely l2tpns) demanding the ifreq-structure being
copied back to userspace - which AFAIK doesn't happen in
