> >> According to your comments, you prefer (2).
> >>
> >> I most definitely prefer (1).
>
> > Hmm, and if some malicious software insmods kernel module to work
> > around your printk()?
>
> ...it gets "Port busy" when it tries to access the RTC ports that the
> RTC driver built into the kernel already has opened exclusively. At
> least, that's my understanding of the situation at present.
It does not work that way. Userland does iopl(0), and then it just
bangs any port it wants to.
> > We are talking root only here.
>
> Are we?
>
> Unless I've misunderstood the arguments so far, the aim is to take the
> RTC driver out of the kernel altogether and replace it with a usermode
> driver to do the same thing. As I see it, that opens up far too many
No. Aim is to leave /dev/rtc in kernel, but make kernel never write to
RTC at its own will.
Pavel
-- Casualities in World Trade Center: 6453 dead inside the building, cryptography in U.S.A. and free speech in Czech Republic. - 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/