From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Artem Bityutskiy Subject: Re: [PATCHv3] UBI: new module ubiblk: block layer on top of UBI Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2011 10:42:13 +0300 Message-ID: <1313998939.2644.52.camel@sauron> References: <1308922482-14967-1-git-send-email-david.wagner@free-electrons.com> <1313587042-30846-1-git-send-email-david.wagner@free-electrons.com> Reply-To: dedekind1@gmail.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=subject:from:reply-to:to:cc:date:in-reply-to:references :content-type:x-mailer:content-transfer-encoding:message-id :mime-version; bh=Oi+8ON14046du8uzDckQITgvjVDVhRDCRdQB8/m5dTk=; b=Jq0zET6u7Gf2CVYmJd1yL/RtZOS6PGqhj6g1thrzp5/Bbxw4I3XwydnST3nK/v8HsE 6JsqIvhk1++iL7r0SNWtzFyYBf21pWC2FK64qqStqDVrGAEEvne64F04H5ShVP1qkdOm rE99RGWk/gvUKNyd+A0w06+NCNyZxK8Pr49s4= In-Reply-To: <1313587042-30846-1-git-send-email-david.wagner@free-electrons.com> Sender: linux-embedded-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: david.wagner@free-electrons.com Cc: linux-mtd , linux-embedded , lkml , Tim Bird , David Woodhouse , Arnd Bergmann On Wed, 2011-08-17 at 15:17 +0200, david.wagner@free-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 From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-gy0-f177.google.com ([209.85.160.177]) by canuck.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.76 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1QvP7U-0000l8-Eg for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 22 Aug 2011 07:40:29 +0000 Received: by gyh20 with SMTP id 20so4165216gyh.36 for ; Mon, 22 Aug 2011 00:40:26 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCHv3] UBI: new module ubiblk: block layer on top of UBI From: Artem Bityutskiy To: david.wagner@free-electrons.com Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2011 10:42:13 +0300 In-Reply-To: <1313587042-30846-1-git-send-email-david.wagner@free-electrons.com> References: <1308922482-14967-1-git-send-email-david.wagner@free-electrons.com> <1313587042-30846-1-git-send-email-david.wagner@free-electrons.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <1313998939.2644.52.camel@sauron> Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: linux-embedded , Arnd Bergmann , lkml , linux-mtd , Tim Bird , David Woodhouse Reply-To: dedekind1@gmail.com List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Wed, 2011-08-17 at 15:17 +0200, david.wagner@free-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