Re: [PATCH] incorrect use of sizeof() in ioctl definitions
From: Matthew Wilcox (willy_at_debian.org)
Date: 10/08/03
- Previous message: Matthew Wilcox: "Re: [PATCH] incorrect use of sizeof() in ioctl definitions"
- In reply to: Tian, Kevin: "RE: [PATCH] incorrect use of sizeof() in ioctl definitions"
- Next in thread: Maciej Zenczykowski: "RE: [PATCH] incorrect use of sizeof() in ioctl definitions"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2003 14:30:17 +0100 To: "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@intel.com>
On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 05:58:53PM +0800, Tian, Kevin wrote:
> Well, I may misunderstand the measurement here. By previous comment from
> Matthew Wilcox, I see "Clearly it's too late to change the ioctl
> definitions...". Er, so all things like IOR_BAD and size_t are just to
> keep current API untouched, while warning subsequent guys right way to
> populate ioctls. :) Then the last question is: is it worthy of some
> efforts to modify these APIs completely? Maybe the bee just bites
> once...
Already done on i386 and some other platforms. Not on ia64 yet, I see.
The bad_ioctl stuff is part of that typechecking.
-- "It's not Hollywood. War is real, war is primarily not about defeat or victory, it is about death. I've seen thousands and thousands of dead bodies. Do you think I want to have an academic debate on this subject?" -- Robert Fisk - 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/
- Previous message: Matthew Wilcox: "Re: [PATCH] incorrect use of sizeof() in ioctl definitions"
- In reply to: Tian, Kevin: "RE: [PATCH] incorrect use of sizeof() in ioctl definitions"
- Next in thread: Maciej Zenczykowski: "RE: [PATCH] incorrect use of sizeof() in ioctl definitions"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
|
