From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754243Ab1AZVlM (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Jan 2011 16:41:12 -0500 Received: from ironport2-out.teksavvy.com ([206.248.154.181]:43349 "EHLO ironport2-out.pppoe.ca" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753531Ab1AZVlK (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Jan 2011 16:41:10 -0500 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApIBADMkQE1Ld/sX/2dsb2JhbAAMhAbNY5B2gSODOHQEhRc X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.60,382,1291611600"; d="scan'208";a="89351901" Message-ID: <4D4094F3.3020607@teksavvy.com> Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 16:41:07 -0500 From: Mark Lord User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-GB; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101207 Thunderbird/3.1.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Dmitry Torokhov CC: Mauro Carvalho Chehab , Linus Torvalds , Linux Kernel , linux-input@vger.kernel.org, linux-media@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: 2.6.36/2.6.37: broken compatibility with userspace input-utils ? References: <20110125205453.GA19896@core.coreip.homeip.net> <4D3F4804.6070508@redhat.com> <4D3F4D11.9040302@teksavvy.com> <20110125232914.GA20130@core.coreip.homeip.net> <20110126020003.GA23085@core.coreip.homeip.net> <4D403855.4050706@teksavvy.com> <4D405A9D.4070607@redhat.com> <4D4076FD.6070207@teksavvy.com> <20110126194127.GE29268@core.coreip.homeip.net> <4D407A46.4080407@teksavvy.com> <20110126195011.GF29268@core.coreip.homeip.net> In-Reply-To: <20110126195011.GF29268@core.coreip.homeip.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 11-01-26 02:50 PM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 02:47:18PM -0500, Mark Lord wrote: >> On 11-01-26 02:41 PM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: >>> >>> I do not consider lsinput refusing to work a regression. >> >> Obviously, since you don't use that tool. >> Those of us who do use it see this as broken userspace compatibility. >> >> Who the hell reviews this crap, anyway? >> Code like that should never have made it upstream in the first place. >> > > You are more than welcome spend more time on reviews. Somehow I detect a totally lack of sincerity there. But thanks for fixing the worst of this regression, at least. Perhaps you might think about eventually fixing the bad use of -EINVAL in future revisions. One way perhaps to approach that, would be to begin fixing it internally, but still returning the same things from the actual f_ops->ioctl() routine. Then eventually provide new ioctl numbers which return the correct -ENOTTY (or whatever is best there), rather than converting to -EVINAL at the interface. Then a nice multi-year overlap, with a scheduled removal of the old codes some day. Then the input subsystem would work more like most other subsystems, and make userspace programming simpler and easier to "get correct". Cheers