Re: ioctl32 consolidation -- call for testing

[Ben Collins <bcollins@debian.org>]

On Thu, Feb 27, 2003 at 12:21:26PM -0800, David S. Miller wrote:
>    From: Ben Collins <bcollins@debian.org>
>    Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 15:34:40 -0500
> 
>    On Thu, Feb 27, 2003 at 12:13:02PM -0800, David S. Miller wrote:
>    >    From: Ben Collins <bcollins@debian.org>
>    >    Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 15:27:39 -0500
>    >    
>    >    Here it is. Sparc64's macros for ioctl32's assumed that cmd was u_int
>    >    instead of u_long. This look ok to you, Dave?
>    > 
>    > We would love to see that patch :-)
>    
>    It was real small...so small that it slipped through mutt's open() call
>    and never got attached :)
> 
> Well, you just doubled the size of the table on sparc64.
> I don't know if I like that.

Not much of a way around it. Might seem like a big hit now (I think it's
like 4k extra), but once these ioctl's start moving into their own
driver, and out of arch/*/ioctl32.c, you'll start to get savings anyway.

-- 
Debian     - http://www.debian.org/
Linux 1394 - http://www.linux1394.org/
Subversion - http://subversion.tigris.org/
Deqo       - http://www.deqo.com/