From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754547Ab0EOO4i (ORCPT ); Sat, 15 May 2010 10:56:38 -0400 Received: from isilmar-3.linta.de ([188.40.101.200]:45472 "EHLO linta.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753815Ab0EOO4g (ORCPT ); Sat, 15 May 2010 10:56:36 -0400 Date: Sat, 15 May 2010 16:55:58 +0200 From: Dominik Brodowski To: rmk@arm.linux.org.uk Cc: linux-pcmcia@lists.infradead.org, Alan Cox , "Robert P. J. Day" , Jaswinder Singh Rajput , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Vincent Sanders Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] pcmcia: disable pcmcia ioctl for !ARM, prepare for removal Message-ID: <20100515145558.GA3184@comet.dominikbrodowski.net> Mail-Followup-To: rmk@arm.linux.org.uk, linux-pcmcia@lists.infradead.org, Alan Cox , "Robert P. J. Day" , Jaswinder Singh Rajput , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Vincent Sanders References: <20100303075944.GA23354@comet.dominikbrodowski.net> <1267603248-23866-5-git-send-email-linux@dominikbrodowski.net> <20100515142409.GB18960@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> <20100515143705.GA10617@isilmar-3.linta.de> <20100515144639.GA10987@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100515144639.GA10987@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Russell, On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 03:46:39PM +0100, Russell King wrote: > On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 04:37:05PM +0200, Dominik Brodowski wrote: > > Russell, > > > > On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 03:24:10PM +0100, Russell King wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 03, 2010 at 09:00:48AM +0100, Dominik Brodowski wrote: > > > > Furthermore, the last legitimate use of the ioctl to be reported > > > > relates to the ARM architecture in 2008.[1] Attempts to resolve > > > > this issue turned out unsuccessful so far.[2] Other usages have only > > > > been reported as hear-say. If there are any legitiate and necessary > > > > use-cases remaining, please speak out before the end of the grace > > > > period until 2.6.3{5,6}(-rc1). > > > > > > What's the point of speaking out? You don't take any notice of people > > > who do, and you continue your crusade of wanting to remove it. Please, > > > stop giving the impression that you give a damn of what people say about > > > the ioctl interface. > > > > The _only_ person who really has spoken out is you. All my requests to > > actually see source code or actual use cases (e.g. which parts of the ioctl > > do actually get called) did not lead to _anything_. > > See the source code? You clearly haven't been reading what I've been > saying to you on the subject if you think I can produce source code. > I've already explained this to you several times, but it seems to be > constantly ignored. That's why there is the _other_ alternative: "actual use cases (e.g. which parts of the ioctl do actually get called)". For this, you only need to be able to update/modify the kernel. More than two years ago, you signalised to do exactly this: | 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. [ http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-pcmcia/2008-April/005450.html ] I haven't heard anything about the result of this experiment, even though asking a number of times (e.g. http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-pcmcia/2010-January/006740.html ). Best, Dominik