>>>>> "Tim" == Tim Waugh <twaugh@redhat.com> writes:
Tim> On Tue, Jun 19, 2001 at 07:01:21PM +0200, Uwe Bonnes wrote:
>> I don't want an emulated port, I want to allow the emulated program
>> to access the hardware. It could be done by running the emulation
>> program with root access and do the inb() and outb() direct, but
>> that's not good for the savefy of the system.
Tim> It sounds like you want a way of restricting the I/O regions that
Tim> /dev/port has access to, rather than using ppdev to bypass itself.
Tim> Like:
Tim> struct region reg = { base: 0x378, extent: 3 }; int port = open
Tim> ("/dev/port", O_RDWR); int ecr = open ("/dev/port", O_RDWR); ioctl
Tim> (port, RESTRICT, ®); reg.base += 0x400; ioctl (ecr, RESTRICT,
Tim> ®); drop_privs(); ...
Tim> I can see the use for that kind of thing.
This sounds interesting, but has following drawbacks:
- either the emulation program needs to run as root
- or /dev/ports need to be accessible for non root users
- another program might access /dev/lpx while the emulation program forwards
parallel port accesses to offset 0x378 of /dev/port
Accessing the parallel port via the ppdev has the advantage that the
parallel port resource is still handles by the kernel.
What was the rational that the PPRECONTROL/PPWECONTROL/PPRFIFO/PPWFIFO iocts
were removed?
Bye
-- Uwe Bonnes bon@elektron.ikp.physik.tu-darmstadt.deInstitut fuer Kernphysik Schlossgartenstrasse 9 64289 Darmstadt --------- Tel. 06151 162516 -------- Fax. 06151 164321 ----------
-- To unsubscribe, send mail to: linux-parport-request@torque.net -- -- with the single word "unsubscribe" in the body of the message. --
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jun 19 2001 - 13:47:41 EDT