[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210120194609.GA3843758@infradead.org>
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2021 19:46:09 +0000
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
Cc: gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, logang@...tatee.com,
Hans Verkuil <hans.verkuil@...co.com>,
Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...e-electrons.com>,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] cdev: Finish the cdev api with queued mode support
The subject doesn't make any sense to me.
But thn again queued sound really weird. You just have a managed
API with a refcount and synchronization, right?
procfs and debugfs already support these kind of managed ops, kinda sad
to duplicate this concept yet another time.
> +static long cdev_queued_ioctl(struct file *file, unsigned int cmd, unsigned long arg)
Overly long line.
> +__must_check int __cdev_register_queued(struct cdev *cdev, struct module *owner,
> + dev_t dev, unsigned count,
> + const struct cdev_operations *qops)
> +{
> + int rc;
> +
> + if (!qops->ioctl || !owner)
> + return -EINVAL;
Why is the ioctl method mandatory?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists