From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.nokia.com ([192.100.122.233] helo=mgw-mx06.nokia.com) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.68 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1L9j5W-0000vE-6M for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 08 Dec 2008 16:36:02 +0000 Message-ID: <493D4C63.5040502@yandex.ru> Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2008 18:33:39 +0200 From: Artem Bityutskiy MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Arnd Bergmann Subject: Re: UBI/DVB ioctl conflict? References: <20081207095811.13b51cca@zod.rchland.ibm.com> <200812081041.14178.laurentp@cse-semaphore.com> <1228729915.13686.95.camel@sauron> <200812081650.54346.arnd@arndb.de> In-Reply-To: <200812081650.54346.arnd@arndb.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 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: , Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Monday 08 December 2008, Artem Bityutskiy wrote: >> On Mon, 2008-12-08 at 10:41 +0100, Laurent Pinchart wrote: >>> Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't this only matters for devices that would >>> implement both the UBI and DVB API on the same inode ? That would be quite >>> unlikely. >> Yeah, I guess. But this anyway makes sense to keep ioctls >> non-overlapping. > > 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? -- Best Regards, Artem Bityutskiy (Артём Битюцкий)