On Thu, 22 Jun 2023 19:03:04 +0200 Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > Correct. For now we are just using 0xa0 and 0xa1, and eventually we > > might need more ioctls numbers. > > > > I got these numbers finding a unused block and having some room for > > expansion, as suggested by Documentation/userspace-api/ioctl/ioctl-number.rst, > > that says: > > > > If you are writing a driver for a new device and need a letter, pick an > > unused block with enough room for expansion: 32 to 256 ioctl commands. > > So is this the first io_uring ioctl? If so, why is this an ioctl and > not just a "normal" io_uring call? +1, the mixing with classic ioctl seems confusing and I'm not sure if it buys us anything. -- pw-bot: cr
