On 2021/08/03 0:56, Bart Van Assche wrote: > On 8/2/21 2:21 AM, Damien Le Moal wrote: >> /* >> - * 8 best effort priority levels are supported >> + * The RT an BE priority classes support up to 8 priority levels. >> */ >> -#define IOPRIO_BE_NR (8) >> +#define IOPRIO_NR_LEVELS (8) > > Is this kind of change acceptable in a UAPI header? Can this change > break the build of user space applications? These definitions moving to a uapi header is new in 5.15. So they are not currently in an uapi header. This is our chance to clean things up. > > If this change is acceptable, how about the name IOPRIO_NR_BE_LEVELS? > Additionally, please leave out the parentheses since these are not > necessary. As the commit message mentions, the 8 possible priority levels are used for the RT class too. So it is not just about the BE class. That is why I would prefer removing "BE" from the macro name. Or, we need 2 macro: IOPRIO_NR_BE_LEVELS and IOPRIO_NR_RT_LEVELS. But that will only force adding duplicated checks in functions like ioprio_check_cap(). > > Thanks, > > Bart. > -- Damien Le Moal Western Digital Research
