Messages in this thread | | | Subject | ioctl assignment strategy? | From | Al Hooton <> | Date | Tue, 14 Dec 2004 15:31:07 -0800 |
| |
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/
| |