Subject: Re: [PATCH] hpet header sanitization
From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Cc: Clemens Ladisch <clemens@ladisch.de>,
       "Randy.Dunlap" <rdunlap@xenotime.net>,
       lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, akpm <akpm@osdl.org>
In-Reply-To: <200603222345.45718.arnd@arndb.de>
References: <20060321144607.153d1943.rdunlap@xenotime.net>
	 <200603221118.43853.abergman@de.ibm.com>
	 <20060322111446.GA7675@turing.informatik.uni-halle.de>
	 <200603222345.45718.arnd@arndb.de>
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 09:13:40 +0100
Message-Id: <1143101620.3147.7.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1271
Lines: 26

On Wed, 2006-03-22 at 23:45 +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Wednesday 22 March 2006 12:14, Clemens Ladisch wrote:
> > There isn't any program (except the example in the docs) that uses any
> > of these ioctls, and I'm writing patches to make this device available
> > through portable timer APIs like hrtimer/POSIX clocks/ALSA that are much
> > easier to use besides, so I think it would be a good idea to just
> > schedule these ioctls for removal.
> 
> Ok, in that case I guess all of the header file should be wrapped inside
> #ifdef __KERNEL__. Until now it was not possible to include that header
> file in order to get the ioctl definition. It would be somewhat
> counterproductive to schedule the user interface for removal while at
> the same time making it easier to use it.
> 
> Also, I don't see any user of the ioctl function in the kernel, although
> it's exported. Are there any out-of-tree users?


hmm there used to be (in s390 iirc ;) but now it's a good opportunity
for Adrian to do a cleanup patch for it 

-
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/