From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dmitry Torokhov Subject: Re: [Pv-drivers] [PATCH 12/12] VMCI: Some header and config files. Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2012 12:09:40 -0800 Message-ID: <20121130200940.GA12740@dtor-ws.eng.vmware.com> References: <20121127002357.GA27683@core.coreip.homeip.net> <27667508.9ZL27Yq4ZC@dtor-d630.eng.vmware.com> <20121130185755.GA26841@kroah.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20121130185755.GA26841@kroah.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Errors-To: virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org To: Greg KH Cc: pv-drivers@vmware.com, Andy King , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org List-Id: virtualization@lists.linuxfoundation.org On Friday, November 30, 2012 10:57:55 AM Greg KH wrote: > On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 10:45:44AM -0800, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > However you snipped the rest of my reply: do we really need to renumber > > ioctls? There is no benefit for the driver as its ioctl handler does > > not parse the numbers into components. > > I don't know if you need to renumber, I really don't understand what you > were trying to do with this code, and as it was acting differently from > all other kernel ioctl declarations, I asked for some clarity. > > If you can rewrite it to look sane, and keep the same numbers, that's > fine with me. OK, it looks like we can redo them as: #define IOCTL_VMCI_VERSION _IO(7, 0x9f) /* 1951 */ #define IOCTL_VMCI_INIT_CONTEXT _IO(7, 0xa0) /* 1952 */ Is this acceptable? Thanks, Dmitry