From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 19 May 2001 22:19:26 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 19 May 2001 22:19:07 -0400 Received: from parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk ([195.92.249.252]:32525 "EHLO www.linux.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sat, 19 May 2001 22:18:58 -0400 Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 03:18:07 +0100 From: Matthew Wilcox To: Richard Gooch Cc: Alan Cox , Alexander Viro , Andrew Clausen , Ben LaHaise , torvalds@transmeta.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFD w/info-PATCH] device arguments from lookup, partion code Message-ID: <20010520031807.G23718@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <200105191851.f4JIpNK00364@mobilix.ras.ucalgary.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <200105191851.f4JIpNK00364@mobilix.ras.ucalgary.ca>; from rgooch@ras.ucalgary.ca on Sat, May 19, 2001 at 12:51:23PM -0600 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, May 19, 2001 at 12:51:23PM -0600, Richard Gooch wrote: > Al, if you really want to kill ioctl(2), then perhaps you should > implement a transaction(2) syscall. Something like: > int transaction (int fd, void *rbuf, size_t rlen, > void *wbuf, size_t wlen); > > Of course, there wouldn't be any practical gain, since we already have > ioctl(2). Any gain would be aesthetic. I can tell you haven't had to write any 32-bit ioctl emulation code for a 64-bit kernel recently. -- Revolutions do not require corporate support.