linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv3] UBI: new module ubiblk: block layer on top of UBI

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 22 Aug 2011 10:42:13 +0300
From:	Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@...il.com>
To:	david.wagner@...e-electrons.com
Cc:	linux-mtd <linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org>,
	linux-embedded <linux-embedded@...r.kernel.org>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Tim Bird <tim.bird@...sony.com>,
	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv3] UBI: new module ubiblk: block layer on top of UBI

On Wed, 2011-08-17 at 15:17 +0200, david.wagner@...e-electrons.com
wrote:
> Questions:
> ==========
> I wasn't sure what magic ioctl number to use, so I settled to use the same one
> as a part of UBI: 'O', which was so far only used by UBI but on a higher range
> and leaving some room for UBI to add ioctls (for nw, it uses 'O'/0x00-0x06 and
> ubiblk uses 'O'/0x10-0x11).  Is it ok or should ubiblk use a different
> number/range ?

I think this is OK to share them between UBI and ubiblk, as long as this
is documented. But I always CC Arnd when it comes to ioctl-related
questions.

P.S. Arnd, you can always find the initial post in lkml, if needed.

-- 
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy

--
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/