On Mon, Aug 07, 2023 at 05:22:18PM +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote: > On Tue, 01 Aug 2023 19:51:39 +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 01, 2023 at 02:54:45PM +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote: ... > I rather wonder why it can't be simple strncpy(). This is obvious. To avoid compiler warning about 0 (possible) truncation. ... > > Taking all remarks into account I would rather go with sockptr.h being > > untouched for now, just a big > > > > /* DO NOT USE, it's obsolete, use uniptr.h instead! */ > > > > to be added. > > Possibly that's a safer choice. But the biggest question is whether > we want a generic type or not. Let's try to ask it first. > > Interestingly, this file doesn't belong to any subsystem in > MAINTAINERS, so I'm not sure who to be Cc'ed. Chirstoph as the > original author and net dev, maybe. Yes, but actually it's fine to just copy and change sockptr.h to say "that's blablabla for net subsystem" (maybe this is implied by the name?). In that case we just introduce our copy and can do whatever modifications we want (see previous reply). -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
