From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1767188AbXCILRd (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Mar 2007 06:17:33 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1767193AbXCILRc (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Mar 2007 06:17:32 -0500 Received: from hp3.statik.TU-Cottbus.De ([141.43.120.68]:49791 "EHLO hp3.statik.tu-cottbus.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1767188AbXCILRc (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Mar 2007 06:17:32 -0500 Message-ID: <45F14232.5060703@s5r6.in-berlin.de> Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2007 12:17:06 +0100 From: Stefan Richter User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.8.0.9) Gecko/20061211 SeaMonkey/1.0.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Robert P. J. Day" CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: any thoughts yet on a "generic" ioctl.h? References: <45F0D798.4050602@s5r6.in-berlin.de> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Robert P. J. Day wrote: > each simplification could be submitted as > a separate arch-specific patch, as many things are. > > i was more asking about the *philosophy* of that patch, The justification of this initial patch is more obvious if followed up by those subsequent patches which make use of the initial one. -- Stefan Richter -=====-=-=== --== --=== http://arcgraph.de/sr/