lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Dec]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Subjectioctl assignment strategy?
From
Date
	It was 6-7 years ago that I last worked on driver level stuff, I expect
I've got a whack with a cluebat coming....

Do we care about "official" ioctl assignments any more? Or, am I not
grokking some change that removes the need to submit patched files to
keep externally developed drivers from potentially colliding with their
ioctl's?

If we still need to do something to make our ioctl's "official", what
is it? The comments in Documentation/ioctl-number.txt *can't* still be
accurate, I don't believe.

I've been through ioctl-number.txt, looked through the various
ioctl(s).h and related kernel source for managing ioctl's, believe I
understand the _IOxx and _IOxx_xxx macros, searched the list archives,
googled, and I'm left with this one answered question...


Thanks,
Al


-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:08    [W:0.076 / U:0.644 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site