lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Sep]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [discuss] f_ops flag to speed up compatible ioctls in linux kernel
Hello!
Quoting r. Andi Kleen (ak@suse.de) "Re: [discuss] f_ops flag to speed up compatible ioctls in linux kernel":
> On Tue, Sep 07, 2004 at 05:37:02PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > Hello!
> > Quoting r. Andi Kleen (ak@suse.de) "Re: [discuss] f_ops flag to speed up compatible ioctls in linux kernel":
> > > On Tue, Sep 07, 2004 at 05:25:30PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > > > It may help your module, but won't solve the general problem shorter
> > > > > term.
> > > > But longer term it will be better, so why not go there?
> > > > Once the infrastructure is there, drivers will be able to be
> > > > migrated as required.
> > >
> > > I have no problems with that. You would need two new entry points:
> > > one 64bit one without BKL and a 32bit one also without BKL.
> > >
> > > I think there were some objections to this scheme in the past,
> > > but I cannot think of a good alternative.
> > >
> >
> > Maybe one entry point with a flag?
>
> That would be IMHO far uglier than two.
>
> -Andi
>

What would be a good name? ioctl32/ioctl64? ioctl_compat/ioctl_native?

-
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 14:06    [W:0.212 / U:0.012 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site