From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@transmeta.com> To: Russell King <rmk@arm.linux.org.uk> Subject: Re: [RFD w/info-PATCH] device arguments from lookup, partion code Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 12:10:59 -0700 (PDT) Cc: Richard Gooch <rgooch@ras.ucalgary.ca>, Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx>, Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>, Alexander Viro <viro@math.psu.edu>, Andrew Clausen <clausen@gnu.org>, Ben LaHaise <bcrl@redhat.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, 20 May 2001, Russell King wrote: > > On Sun, May 20, 2001 at 11:46:33AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > Nobody will expect the above to work, and everybody will agree that the > > above is a BUG if the read() call will actually follow the pointer. > > I didn't say anything about read(). I said write(). Obviously it > wouldn't work for read()! No, but the point is, everybody _would_ consider it a bug if a low-level driver "write()" did anything but touched the explicit buffer. Code like that would not pass through anybody's yuck-o-meter. People would point fingers and say "That is not a legal write() function". Anybody who tried to make write() follow pointers would be laughed at as a stupid git. Anybody who makes "ioctl()" do the same is just following years of standard practice, and the yuck-o-meter doesn't even register. THAT is the importance of psychology. Technology is meaningless. What matters is how people _think_ of it. Linus - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/