From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andy Grover Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] scsi: Remove scsi_ioctl.h Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2015 13:26:18 -0800 Message-ID: <54AEF5FA.2030104@redhat.com> References: <1420746479-25949-1-git-send-email-agrover@redhat.com> <1420746479-25949-4-git-send-email-agrover@redhat.com> <1420749302.5830.31.camel@HansenPartnership.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:34303 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752198AbbAHV0X (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Jan 2015 16:26:23 -0500 In-Reply-To: <1420749302.5830.31.camel@HansenPartnership.com> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: James Bottomley Cc: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, hch@lst.de On 01/08/2015 12:35 PM, James Bottomley wrote: > On Thu, 2015-01-08 at 11:47 -0800, Andy Grover wrote: >> Now that we have uapi/scsi/scsi.h, that is the logical place for SCSI ioctl >> definitions to go. The kernel-specific stuff that remains is so little that >> it can be folded into scsi/scsi.h, and scsi_ioctl.h removed. >> >> Remove all scsi_ioctl.h #includes since they all also include scsi/scsi.h, >> except for ide-floppy_ioctl.c where we just replace it with including >> scsi/scsi.h. > > What's the transition plan for userspace? If you look at glibc > currently, it supplies both scsi.h and scsi_ioctl.h. If we're > persuading the glibc folks to go with our versions from uapi, I think > removing a file which is an effective compile breaker for userspace is a > really bad idea. Duplicating scsi_ioctl.h definitions in scsi.h would > also cause them problems. I will consult with the glibc devs and see what they think, and get back to you. Thanks -- Andy