On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 5:00 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 03, 2016 at 07:42:43PM -0300, Gustavo Padovan wrote: >> From: Gustavo Padovan <gustavo.padovan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> >> Burn the old opcode to avoid any potential old userspace running the old >> API to get weird errors. Changing the opcodes will make them fail right >> away. >> >> This is just a precaution, there no upstream users of these interfaces >> yet and the only user is Android, but we don't expect anyone trying to >> run android userspace and all it dependencies on top of upstream kernels. >> >> Moreover Android should be converted to use upstream sync_files. >> >> Suggested-by: Rob Clark <robdclark@xxxxxxxxx> >> Signed-off-by: Gustavo Padovan <gustavo.padovan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> drivers/staging/android/uapi/sync.h | 11 +++++++++-- >> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > Where does this belong in this patch series? Before it? After it? In > the middle? Not sure if overkill, but if we wanted to be pedantic about bisectability put all the uabi struct changes plus ioctl # changes into a single patch (with the following patches starting to use the new fields)? Either way, I think the only two people in the world effected by this (ie. who are playing with AOSP on an upstream (plus a few patches) kernel) are Rob Herring and John Stultz. (Adding them to CC so they are aware). BR, -R > Please resend the whole series, gather up all of the reviewed and > signed-off-by markings from everyone involved, and I'll be glad to apply > them. > > thanks, > > greg k-h _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
