On Wed, Apr 03, 2024 at 07:27:55AM +0200, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> On 02. 04. 24, 15:19, Alexey Gladkov wrote:
> >>> --- a/include/uapi/linux/kd.h
> >>> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/kd.h
> ...
> >>> +struct console_font_info {
> >>> + unsigned int min_width, min_height; /* minimal font size */
> >>> + unsigned int max_width, max_height; /* maximum font size */
> >>> + unsigned int flags; /* KD_FONT_INFO_FLAG_* */
> >>
> >> This does not look like a well-defined™ and extendable uapi structure.
> >> While it won't change anything here, still use fixed-length __u32.
> >>
> >> And you should perhaps add some reserved fields. Do not repeat the same
> >> mistakes as your predecessors with the current kd uapi.
> >
> > I thought about it, but I thought it would be overengineering.
>
> It would not. UAPI structs are set in stone once released.
>
> And in this case, it's likely you would want to know more info about
> fonts in the future.
>
> > Can you suggest how best to do this?
>
> Given you have flags in there already (to state that the structure
> contains more), just add an array of u32 reserved[] space. 3 or 5, I
> would say (to align the struct to 64bit).
struct console_font_info {
__u32 min_width, min_height; /* minimal font size */
__u32 max_width, max_height; /* maximum font size */
__u32 flags; /* KD_FONT_INFO_FLAG_* */
__u32 reserved[5]; /* This field is reserved forfuture use. Must be 0. */
};
So, struct should be like this ?
I wouldn't add the version to the flags. Maybe it would be better to add a
separate field with the version?
--
Rgrds, legion
