On Tue, 29 Apr 2008 22:56:20 +0100
Russell King <rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk> wrote:

quoted text
> On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 02:38:24PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Tue, 29 Apr 2008 14:15:20 -0700
> > Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xenotime.net> wrote:
> > 
> > > > > I believe Russell is referring to the removal of the ioctl, not the
> > > > > compile breakage.
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > That would be interesting information (although I have a vague feeling that
> > > > it has been discussed before).
> > > 
> > > Yes:  http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/2/27/291
> > > (now that Harvey reminded me/us)
> > 
> > oh, OK, whatever, that's easy.  I dropped the old patch and queued this
> > one:
> 
> I'll spend some time this coming weekend working out precisely what it
> requires from the ioctl interface - maybe we can have a cut-down ioctl
> interface that bolts straight on as an "add on" to the new controls
> without being too invasive, while still allowing its PCMCIA bits to
> work.

umm, well,

a) as your machine still needed the ioctl code, we can assume that there
   are others out there.  So it's unclear that we _can_ delete it, or change
   its interfaces.

b) the rate of change in that code is very close to zero.  I'd say just let
   it be.  It's not a good use of one's time?

--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/