From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: James Bottomley Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] scsi: Remove scsi_ioctl.h Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2015 12:35:02 -0800 Message-ID: <1420749302.5830.31.camel@HansenPartnership.com> References: <1420746479-25949-1-git-send-email-agrover@redhat.com> <1420746479-25949-4-git-send-email-agrover@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from bedivere.hansenpartnership.com ([66.63.167.143]:42392 "EHLO bedivere.hansenpartnership.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752089AbbAHUfF (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Jan 2015 15:35:05 -0500 In-Reply-To: <1420746479-25949-4-git-send-email-agrover@redhat.com> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Andy Grover Cc: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, hch@lst.de On Thu, 2015-01-08 at 11:47 -0800, Andy Grover wrote: > Now that we have uapi/scsi/scsi.h, that is the logical place for SCSI ioctl > definitions to go. The kernel-specific stuff that remains is so little that > it can be folded into scsi/scsi.h, and scsi_ioctl.h removed. > > Remove all scsi_ioctl.h #includes since they all also include scsi/scsi.h, > except for ide-floppy_ioctl.c where we just replace it with including > scsi/scsi.h. What's the transition plan for userspace? If you look at glibc currently, it supplies both scsi.h and scsi_ioctl.h. If we're persuading the glibc folks to go with our versions from uapi, I think removing a file which is an effective compile breaker for userspace is a really bad idea. Duplicating scsi_ioctl.h definitions in scsi.h would also cause them problems. James