On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 4:00 PM Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sat, Sep 12, 2020 at 4:21 AM Kent Gibson <warthog618@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 11, 2020 at 05:28:46PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > On Fri, Sep 11, 2020 at 06:17:14PM +0800, Kent Gibson wrote: ... > > > I don't like the difference between 2nd and 3rd argument. This what looks to me > > > hackish. Variant with explicit compat structure I like more. > > > > > > > Agreed - writing it that way does look pretty nasty. > > > > But my suggestion is actually this: > > > > ret = copy_to_user(buf, &ge, event_size); > > > > I suggested ge_size previously, but event_size might help highlight that > > it isn't always sizeof(ge). > > > > > But if you think it's okay, I will update your way. > > > > > > > I would defer to Bart or Linus, but I think just calculating the > > appropriate size is preferable for this case. > > > > Cheers, > > Kent. > > Kent has been producing clean and elegant code so far so I trust him > on code quality issues TBH. Personally in this case however I'd go > with an explicit compat structure as Andy prefers. > > I don't have a strong opinion on this so I really am fine either way. Since the initial idea was Arnd's and he agreed on Kent's approach, I will re-do that way. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko