[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2023042459-humbly-confusing-9721@gregkh>
Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2023 14:54:38 +0200
From: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: "Starke, Daniel" <daniel.starke@...mens.com>
Cc: "linux-serial@...r.kernel.org" <linux-serial@...r.kernel.org>,
"jirislaby@...nel.org" <jirislaby@...nel.org>,
"ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com" <ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/8] tty: n_gsm: add restart parameter to DLC specific
ioctl config
On Mon, Apr 24, 2023 at 11:03:26AM +0000, Starke, Daniel wrote:
> > > --- a/include/uapi/linux/gsmmux.h
> > > +++ b/include/uapi/linux/gsmmux.h
> > > @@ -58,7 +58,8 @@ struct gsm_dlci_config {
> > > __u32 priority; /* Priority (0 for default value) */
> > > __u32 i; /* Frame type (1 = UIH, 2 = UI) */
> > > __u32 k; /* Window size (0 for default value) */
> > > - __u32 reserved[8]; /* For future use, must be initialized to zero */
> > > + __u32 restart; /* Force DLCI channel reset? */
> >
> > Why are you using a full 32 bits for just 1 bit of data here? Why not
> > use a bitfield?
>
> The ioctrl guide states:
> Bitfields and enums generally work as one would expect them to,
> but some properties of them are implementation-defined, so it is better
> to avoid them completely in ioctl interfaces.
>
> Therefore, I tried to avoid them here.
Then use a u8?
> > And what happened to the request to turn the documentation for this
> > structure into proper kerneldoc format?
>
> That applied to patch 2/8 and is unrelated to this patch. Another patch
> will need to fix this.
>
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230424075251.5216-2-daniel.starke@siemens.com/
It's kind of related in that the format is not right :)
As it's a few weeks before I am allowed to even apply this, please
rework the series a bit.
thanks,
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists