From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: From: Andreas Dilger Message-Id: <200101130143.f0D1hNF19829@webber.adilger.net> In-Reply-To: <20010113114507.D15915@linuxcare.com> "from Anton Blanchard at Jan 13, 2001 11:45:07 am" Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 18:43:23 -0700 (MST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [linux-lvm] Re: *** ANNOUNCEMENT *** LVM 0.9.1 beta1 available at www.sistina.com Sender: linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com Errors-To: linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com Reply-To: linux-lvm@sistina.com List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Anton Blanchard Cc: Mauelshagen@sistina.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-lvm@sistina.comlvm@sistina.com Anton, you write: > Have a look at 2.4, arch/sparc64/kernel/ioctl32.c Yuk. > Would it be possible to clean up the ioctl interface so we dont need > such large hacks for LVM support? I can do the work but I want to be > sure you guys will agree to it. What is the reason for all this? Alignment/wordsize/other? If you look at the IOP10 code, much of the in-core data structs were changed to int or long, so this sparc code may not be necessary. It may in fact be damaging, because I don't know if any of the LVM developers even know it is there, and surely it will be out of sync... Cheers, Andreas -- Andreas Dilger \ "If a man ate a pound of pasta and a pound of antipasto, \ would they cancel out, leaving him still hungry?" http://www-mddsp.enel.ucalgary.ca/People/adilger/ -- Dogbert