Messages in this thread | | | From | Jeff Moyer <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/4] nvdimm: Add IOCTL pass thru | Date | Wed, 11 Nov 2015 10:41:37 -0500 |
| |
Jerry Hoemann <jerry.hoemann@hpe.com> writes:
> On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 01:05:20PM -0500, Jeff Moyer wrote: >> Jerry Hoemann <jerry.hoemann@hpe.com> writes: >> >> > Add internal data structure for ndctl_passthru call. >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Jerry Hoemann <jerry.hoemann@hpe.com> >> > --- >> > include/linux/libnvdimm.h | 1 + >> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) >> > >> > diff --git a/include/linux/libnvdimm.h b/include/linux/libnvdimm.h >> > index 3f021dc..01117e1 100644 >> > --- a/include/linux/libnvdimm.h >> > +++ b/include/linux/libnvdimm.h >> > @@ -72,6 +72,7 @@ struct nvdimm_bus_descriptor { >> > unsigned long dsm_mask; >> > char *provider_name; >> > ndctl_fn ndctl; >> > + ndctl_fn ndctl_passthru; >> >> I don't think this is necessary. Vector off inside of __nd_ioctl. That >> especially makes sense if you do switch to passthrough as a command >> instead of a type, but it can work either way. >> > > In an earlier version, I added a "type" argument to ndctl_fn and switched > internally based upon that. I just came to the conclusion that I'd rather > have two separate acpi_nfit_ctl functions than one trying to do both sets > of argument marshaling. This is quite different both internally and > to the caller. > > So, I thought it would be less confusing to the next engineer, and that > this was a good logical separation point.
I'll leave this up to Dan. To me, it doesn't make sense to add a new ioctl function for every new type of ioctl that get's added (assuming more types will follow).
Cheers, Jeff
| |