[Bug 289812] [vt] Make frsig field optional in VT_SETMODE.
- Reply: bugzilla-noreply_a_freebsd.org: "[Bug 289812] [vt] Make frsig field optional in VT_SETMODE."
- Reply: bugzilla-noreply_a_freebsd.org: "[Bug 289812] [vt] Make frsig field optional in VT_SETMODE."
- Reply: bugzilla-noreply_a_freebsd.org: "[Bug 289812] [vt] Make frsig field optional in VT_SETMODE."
- Reply: bugzilla-noreply_a_freebsd.org: "[Bug 289812] [vt] Make frsig field optional in VT_SETMODE."
- Reply: bugzilla-noreply_a_freebsd.org: "[Bug 289812] [vt] Make frsig field optional in VT_SETMODE."
- Reply: bugzilla-noreply_a_freebsd.org: "[Bug 289812] [vt] Make frsig field optional in VT_SETMODE."
- Reply: bugzilla-noreply_a_freebsd.org: "[Bug 289812] [vt] Make frsig field optional in VT_SETMODE."
- Reply: bugzilla-noreply_a_freebsd.org: "[Bug 289812] Make frsig field optional in VT_SETMODE."
- Reply: bugzilla-noreply_a_freebsd.org: "[Bug 289812] Make frsig field optional in VT_SETMODE."
- Reply: bugzilla-noreply_a_freebsd.org: "[Bug 289812] Make frsig field optional in VT_SETMODE."
- Reply: bugzilla-noreply_a_freebsd.org: "[Bug 289812] Make frsig field optional in VT_SETMODE."
- Reply: bugzilla-noreply_a_freebsd.org: "[Bug 289812] Make frsig field optional in VT_SETMODE."
- Go to: [ bottom of page ] [ top of archives ] [ this month ]
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2025 13:05:41 UTC
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=289812
Bug ID: 289812
Summary: [vt] Make frsig field optional in VT_SETMODE.
Product: Base System
Version: CURRENT
Hardware: Any
OS: Any
Status: New
Severity: Affects Many People
Priority: ---
Component: kern
Assignee: bugs@FreeBSD.org
Reporter: dusan.gvozdenovic.99@gmail.com
Created attachment 264053
--> https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=264053&action=edit
Proposed change.
The vt_mode::frsig signal is described to be unimplemented [1] in the vt driver
and it does not seem to be used anywhere but we fail the VT_SETMODE call with
EINVAL if it is not a valid signal number [2].
My understanding is that frsig is a historical artifact and that most modern
*NIXes do not implement it (e.g. Linux [3] and Illumos [4]). If that is the
case and there is no outlook for it to be ever implemented, we should probably
not demand it.
[1]
https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-src/blob/7cd7b849b0629a259f4034514cf0e47e82efc44a/sys/sys/consio.h
[2]
https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-src/blob/7cd7b849b0629a259f4034514cf0e47e82efc44a/sys/dev/vt/vt_core.c
[3]
https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/cec1e6e5d1ab33403b809f79cd20d6aff124ccfe/drivers/tty/vt/vt_ioctl.c#L776
[4]
https://github.com/illumos/illumos-gate/blob/92ae099e204069d2fec11f099863387b5317d849/usr/src/uts/common/io/vcons.c#L633
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.