[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <18953.5677.63000.658678@drongo.ozlabs.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 12 May 2009 16:24:45 +1000
From: Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Corey Ashford <cjashfor@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] perf_counter: rework ioctl()s
Peter Zijlstra writes:
> Thanks, I missed that little detail.
>
> Do we still want the new ioctl iteration flag?
Not sure; it might be useful sometimes, I guess. We do need to clear
up the confusion about whether one does ioctl(fd, ..., flag) or
ioctl(fd, ..., &flag), and if the former we shouldn't be using _IOW,
as Arnd pointed out.
Paul.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists