Re: [PATCH 1/2] Update errno and ioctl definitions for newer Linux

[Steve M. <ste...@li...>]

On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 03:58:46AM +0400, Dmitry V. Levin wrote:
>On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 05:36:58PM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
>
>> diff --git a/linux/ioctlent.h.in b/linux/ioctlent.h.in
>> index 98ebbcc..1ca126a 100644
>> --- a/linux/ioctlent.h.in
>> +++ b/linux/ioctlent.h.in
>> @@ -2,6 +2,7 @@
>>  	{"linux/fs.h",	"FIBMAP",	0x0001},
>>  	{"linux/fs.h",	"FIGETBSZ",	0x0002},
>>  	{"linux/fd.h",	"FDGETPRM",	0x0204},
>> +	{"linux/fd.h",	"FDGETPRM32",	0x0204},
>
>I'm not sure such entries are worth adding.  I know we have these
>redundant "*32" entries in linux/ioctlent.h.in already, maybe it's time
>to strip them instead of adding new ones.

OK, sounds fair enough.

>> @@ -737,21 +757,91 @@
>>  	{"sound/asound.h",	"SNDRV_TIMER_IOCTL_PVERSION",	0x5400},
>>  	{"linux/soundcard.h",	"SNDCTL_TMR_TIMEBASE",	0x5401},
>>  	{"sound/asound.h",	"SNDRV_TIMER_IOCTL_NEXT_DEVICE",	0x5401},
>> +	{"asm-generic/ioctls.h",	"TCGETS",	0x5401},
>
>We were adding asm-generic entries to arch-specific ioctlent files before.
>I'm not sure whether we'd rather move all these entries to the common
>ioctlent file as indirectly proposed by this patch.
>Any ideas why we might want to continue the old practice?

Not my codebase... :-)

Then again, it looks like more and more of the ioctls are moving over
there. Maybe time to follow that?

Cheers,
-- 
Steve McIntyre                                ste...@li...
<http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org | Open source software for ARM SoCs