From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756023AbcIAVCP (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Sep 2016 17:02:15 -0400 Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:58875 "EHLO mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755851AbcIAVCE (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Sep 2016 17:02:04 -0400 Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2016 22:46:33 +0200 From: Greg Kroah-Hartman To: "Winkler, Tomas" Cc: Pavel Machek , Ulf Hansson , "Hunter, Adrian" , James Bottomley , "Martin K. Petersen" , Vinayak Holikatti , Andy Lutomirski , Arve Hj?nnev?g , Michael Ryleev , Joao Pinto , Christoph Hellwig , Yaniv Gardi , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 4/8] char: rpmb: provide a user space interface Message-ID: <20160901204633.GB5960@kroah.com> References: <1468873673-21776-1-git-send-email-tomas.winkler@intel.com> <1468873673-21776-5-git-send-email-tomas.winkler@intel.com> <20160805200823.GB7999@amd> <5B8DA87D05A7694D9FA63FD143655C1B542B8AC9@hasmsx108.ger.corp.intel.com> <20160831104955.GA10180@kroah.com> <5B8DA87D05A7694D9FA63FD143655C1B542C5B6F@hasmsx108.ger.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5B8DA87D05A7694D9FA63FD143655C1B542C5B6F@hasmsx108.ger.corp.intel.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.7.0 (2016-08-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Sep 01, 2016 at 08:05:26PM +0000, Winkler, Tomas wrote: > > > > > On Sun, Aug 07, 2016 at 09:44:03AM +0000, Winkler, Tomas wrote: > > > > > > > > On Mon 2016-07-18 23:27:49, Tomas Winkler wrote: > > > > > The user space API is achieved via two synchronous IOCTL. > > > > > > > > IOCTLs? > > > > > > Will fix > > > > > > > > Simplified one, RPMB_IOC_REQ_CMD, were read result cycles is > > > > performed > > > > > by the framework on behalf the user and second, RPMB_IOC_SEQ_CMD > > > > where > > > > > the whole RPMB sequence including RESULT_READ is supplied by the > > caller. > > > > > The latter is intended for easier adjusting of the applications > > > > > that use MMC_IOC_MULTI_CMD ioctl. > > > > > > > > Why " "? > > > Not sure I there is enough clue in your question. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Tomas Winkler > > > > > > > > > + > > > > > +static long rpmb_ioctl(struct file *fp, unsigned int cmd, > > > > > +unsigned long arg) { > > > > > + return __rpmb_ioctl(fp, cmd, (void __user *)arg); } > > > > > + > > > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_COMPAT > > > > > +static long rpmb_compat_ioctl(struct file *fp, unsigned int cmd, > > > > > + unsigned long arg) > > > > > +{ > > > > > + return __rpmb_ioctl(fp, cmd, compat_ptr(arg)); > > > > > +} > > > > > +#endif /* CONFIG_COMPAT */ > > > > > > > > Description of the ioctl is missing, > > > Will add. > > > > > > and it should certainly be designed in a way > > > > that it does not need compat support. > > > > > > The compat_ioctl handler just casts the compat_ptr, I believe this > > > should be done unless the ioctl is globaly registered in > > > fs/compat_ioctl.c, but I might be wrong. > > > > You shouldn't need a compat ioctl for anything new that is added, unless > > your api is really messed up. Please test to be sure, and not use a compat > > ioctl at all, it isn't that hard to do. > > compat_ioctl is called anyhow when CONFIG_COMPAT is set, there is no > way around it, or I'm missing something? Actually there is no more > than that for the COMPAT support in this code. If you don't provide a compat_ioctl() all should be fine, right? thanks, greg k-h