On 07/04/2011 05:38 PM, Sasha Levin wrote:
>
> In general incremental development is great, but I don't want to
> fragment the ABI. I'd like to be able to forward an entire PCI BAR over
> a pipe. That means sending the address/data/length tuple, and both read
> and write support.
Would this mean that for sockets we want to remove the 8 byte limit?
Yes. Register a range and support all sizes.
Perhaps it merits a separate ioctl.
What about eventfds? We can remove the limit there and assume that if
the user asked for more than 8 bytes he knows what he's doing?
I can't really see that as useful. eventfds destroy information;
without datamatch, you have no idea what value was written. Even with
datamatch, you have no idea how many times it was written. With a
range, you also have no idea which address was written. It's pretty
meaningless.
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
