From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from dell-paw-3.cambridge.redhat.com ([195.224.55.237] helo=passion.cambridge.redhat.com) by pentafluge.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 3.22 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 15NvMJ-00063r-00 for ; Sat, 21 Jul 2001 12:55:47 +0100 From: David Woodhouse In-Reply-To: <20010720173422.18538.qmail@nwcst284.netaddress.usa.net> References: <20010720173422.18538.qmail@nwcst284.netaddress.usa.net> To: Eric Cc: Tim Hockin , MTD List Subject: Re: [Re: [structure field names] ] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Sat, 21 Jul 2001 13:01:26 +0100 Message-ID: <30757.995716886@redhat.com> Sender: linux-mtd-admin@lists.infradead.org Errors-To: linux-mtd-admin@lists.infradead.org List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: ebrower@usa.net said: > In the case of the MEMREADOOB and MEMWRITEOOB ioctls, we still must > do conversions so that the u8* is understood by the kernel to be a > 32-bit userspace pointer and not a 64-bit kernelspace pointer. I don't like the MEMREADOOB and MEMWRITEOOB ioctls very much. I'm severely tempted to deprecate them and have a separate device for OOB space access. Does anyone ever actually use the /dev/mtdr read-only devices? > I only brought this up because if the structure member names are > modified, they must be modified in the sparc64 patch as well. This > is, unfortunately, a required headache. I am sympathetic to Tim's request, but at this stage I think the pain of changing names probably outweighs the benefit. -- dwmw2