Re: any thoughts yet on a "generic" ioctl.h?

[Robert P. J. Day]

On Fri, 9 Mar 2007, Stefan Richter wrote:

> Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> >   i asked about this a while back, but i still haven't heard a
> > definitive response as to whether it's acceptable.
>
> Maybe you get response if you post a complete patch.

that *was* the complete patch -- its purpose was simply to make
asm-generic/ioctl.h general enough to allow arch-specific ioctl.h
files to *subsequently* be simplified.  there was no need to do
*everything* in one step -- each simplification could be submitted as
a separate arch-specific patch, as many things are.

i was more asking about the *philosophy* of that patch, and whether
there were any obvious objections.

rday

-- 
========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day
Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry
Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA

http://fsdev.net/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page
========================================================================
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/