[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.20.1612121952371.29051@casper.infradead.org>
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2016 20:00:02 +0000 (GMT)
From: James Simmons <jsimmons@...radead.org>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
cc: devel@...verdev.osuosl.org,
Andreas Dilger <andreas.dilger@...el.com>,
Oleg Drokin <oleg.drokin@...el.com>,
James Simmons <uja.ornl@...oo.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Lustre Development List <lustre-devel@...ts.lustre.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/5] staging: lustre: headers: use proper byteorder
functions in lustre_idl.h
> On Sat, Dec 10, 2016 at 01:06:01PM -0500, James Simmons wrote:
> > In order for lustre_idl.h to be usable for both user
> > land and kernel space it has to use the proper
> > byteorder functions.
>
> Why would userspace need/want all of these inline functions? A uapi
> header file should just have a the structures that are passed
> user/kernel and any needed ioctls. Why would they ever care about
> strange byte flip functions and a ton of inline functions?
>
> I don't think this is needed, of if it is, I really don't want to see
> your crazy userspace code...
Sigh. More cleanups were done based on the idea this was okay. The reason
this was does was when you look at the headers in include/uapi/linux you
see a huge number of headers containing a bunch of inline function. To
an outside project looking to merge their work into the kernel they would
think this is okay. Hopefully all those broken headers will be cleaned
up in the near future. Alright I will look to fixing up our tools to
handle this requirement.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists