Re: [PATCH RESEND 2/4] scsi: sg: implement BLKSSZGET

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 09:59:05AM +0800, Tom Yan wrote:
> If we rename it to e.g. SG_GET_MAX_XFER_BYTES, it will still break
> applications unless we also keep the wrong/ugly/confusing name (and
> you lose the advantage/generality that the two ioctls can be used on
> both sg and "pure" block devices; which seems to be the case of some
> SG_* ioctls as well).

How is that an advantage?  Applications that works with block devices
don't really work with a magic passthrough character device.

> I don't really care enough though. I mean, I'm okay with
> SG_GET_MAX_XFER_BYTES *and* NO "improper" BLKSECTGET. If that will get
> the patch series in, I am willing to send a new version. If not, I'm
> just gonna drop this.

You must assume that there are applications already that depend in the
"weird" BLKSECTGET on sg, given that it has been around so long.  Any
change to the semantics will break them.



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [SCSI Target Devel]     [Linux SCSI Target Infrastructure]     [Kernel Newbies]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [Linux IIO]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux