From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.186]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.68 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1L9ml4-0002fJ-5K for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 08 Dec 2008 20:31:10 +0000 From: Arnd Bergmann To: Artem Bityutskiy Subject: Re: UBI/DVB ioctl conflict? Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2008 21:30:13 +0100 References: <20081207095811.13b51cca@zod.rchland.ibm.com> <200812081650.54346.arnd@arndb.de> <493D4C63.5040502@yandex.ru> In-Reply-To: <493D4C63.5040502@yandex.ru> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200812082130.14420.arnd@arndb.de> Cc: LKML , Laurent Pinchart , linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, v4l-dvb-maintainer@linuxtv.org List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Monday 08 December 2008, Artem Bityutskiy wrote: > Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > We try hard (but sometimes fail) to keep every ioctl number unique. > > The reason for this is that the device drivers are not the only > > pieces of code that look at them. Specifically, three other things > > frequently cause problems here: > > Thanks for the reply. Do you know the status of the > Documentation/ioctl/ioctl-number.txt file - it does not seem to be up-to-date. > Should I document add UBI ioctls there? Yes, please. The best we can do is if everyone documents his own stuff. Arnd <><