On Sat, Oct 13, 2007 at 12:16:29AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > This change seems rather bogus, you're changing the ABI just to work > around a bug in the compat_ioctl layer. Why not just do the compat > code the right way, like the patch below? The underlying ABI is not changing, I hope - the trailing padding in the struct should not affect the processing of the data by dm, and I see no reason to continue maintaining the fiction that the 32-bit and 64-bit ioctls are in some way incompatible with each other when they aren't AFAIK. And yes, a follow-up patch can clean up our use of the compatibility mechanism, going a little bit further than the patch you attached, I hope. Alasdair -- agk@xxxxxxxxxx -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
