[lkml]   [2009]   [Oct]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: is avoiding compat ioctls possible?
    On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 01:05:08PM +1000, Dave Airlie wrote:
    > We've designed that into a/c also, we pad all 64-bit values to 64-bit
    > alignment on all the
    > ioctls we've added to the drm in the past couple of years. Just because of
    > this particular insanity.

    That's actually not needed, just use compat_*64.
    > Assume no mistakes are made, new ioctls designed from scratch

    That seems like a bad assumption. It sounds like you already
    made some.

    > and reviewed to do 32/64-bit properly. The s390 was something I didn't
    > know about but KMS on s390 is probably never going to be something
    > that sees the light of day.

    Well in theory there might be more architectures in the future
    which rely on compat_ptr

    > I'm just amazed that compat_ioctl should be required for all new code.
    > DrNick on irc suggested just doing:
    > if (is_compat_task()) ptr &= 0x00000000FFFFFFFF;

    Such hacks often have problems on BE.


    -- -- Speaking for myself only.

     \ /
      Last update: 2009-10-28 04:21    [W:0.037 / U:2.008 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site