[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1313998939.2644.52.camel@sauron>
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists