On Wed, Dec 08, 2010 at 08:04:50PM +0100, Henrik Rydberg wrote:
quoted text
> > One concern is that while 32 distinct device types should be enough
> 
> > should we plan for larger capability array? Should we use variable
> > length ioctl - like EVIOCGKEY(len) - even though Arnd does not like
> > them?
> 
> 
> Sounds good, but then again the struct approach feels quite extensible too...
> 

Actually the more I think about it the less I like idea of extending the
struct because while keeping ABI is pretty easy there are other issues.

I'll CC you on EVIOCGKEYCODE patch so you can see my concerns.

-- 
Dmitry
--
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/