Re: ioctl(2) vs sys/ioctl.h

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: der Mouse
Date: Saturday, December 18, 2010 - 7:44 pm

>> 	int     ioctl(int, unsigned long, ...);


Must FLUSHR (to continue your example) be defined as an int value?

Obviously there can be ABI issues, but they can be worked around the
same way you work around other compat ABI issues - or ignored, on
arches where ints and void *s are passed sufficiently compatibly.

Or perhaps ioctl could turn into something else after #including the
file that defines I_FLUSH and/or FLUSHR?

I'm just brainstorming possible ways to avoid inflicting a varargs
declaration on all users of ioctl.  I don't know whether there are any
issues which might break the above ideas - assuming anyone besides me
cares, that is.

/~\ The ASCII				  Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
 X  Against HTML		mouse@rodents-montreal.org
/ \ Email!	     7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39  4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
ioctl(2) vs sys/ioctl.h, Paul Goyette, (Sat Dec 18, 5:06 pm)
Re: ioctl(2) vs sys/ioctl.h, Christos Zoulas, (Sat Dec 18, 5:24 pm)
Re: ioctl(2) vs sys/ioctl.h, der Mouse, (Sat Dec 18, 7:44 pm)
Re: ioctl(2) vs sys/ioctl.h, Iain Hibbert, (Sun Dec 19, 2:35 am)
Re: ioctl(2) vs sys/ioctl.h, Paul Goyette, (Sun Dec 19, 9:00 am)
Re: ioctl(2) vs sys/ioctl.h, David Laight, (Sun Dec 19, 12:32 pm)
Re: ioctl(2) vs sys/ioctl.h, Rhialto, (Sun Dec 19, 1:06 pm)
Re: ioctl(2) vs sys/ioctl.h, David Laight, (Sun Dec 19, 1:32 pm)
Re: ioctl(2) vs sys/ioctl.h, der Mouse, (Sun Dec 19, 2:52 pm)
Re: ioctl(2) vs sys/ioctl.h, Christos Zoulas, (Sun Dec 19, 2:59 pm)