Re: is avoiding compat ioctls possible?

David Miller
2009-10-28T08:27:53Z

From: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 09:19:09 +0100

> On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 01:11:41AM -0700, David Miller wrote:
>> From: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
>> Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 08:59:08 +0100
>>
>> >> }
>> >> - chunk_array_ptr = (uint64_t *)(unsigned long)(cs->chunks);
>> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_COMPAT
>> >> + if (is_compat_task())
>> >
>> > Are the COMPAT ifdefs really needed? The compiler should optimize that
>> > away anyways on non compat aware architectures, shouldn't it?
>>
>> There are no non-compat is_compat_task() definitions, nor are there
>> non-compat build definitions of compat_uptr_t and the assosciated
>> interfaces.
>
> That seems wrong then, better fix that too? It would be certainly better
> than adding a lot of ifdefs.

That's usually done by seperating the compat code into a seperate
file and "obj-$(CONFIG_COMPAT) += foo.o" in the Makefile.

That's not really possible here.

Sure, longer term we can provide those kinds of definitions to avoid
the ifdefs, but that's not what my change is about. :-)