On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 12:32:15PM -0500, Stefan Berger wrote: > On 03/10/2016 11:39 AM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > >+/* above flags */ > >+#define VTPM_FLAG_TPM2 1 /* emulator is TPM 2 */ > >+ > >+/* all supported flags */ > >+#define VTPM_FLAGS_ALL (VTPM_FLAG_TPM2) > >+ > >+#define VTPM_TPM 0xa0
A better name would be VTPM_IOC_MAGIC. You should also update Documentation/ioctl/ioctl-number.txt. > >+ > >+#define VTPM_NEW_DEV _IOW(VTPM_TPM, 0x00, struct vtpm_new_dev) > >I'd rather use VTPM_IOC_NEW_DEV. > > What about the name of the structure ? vtpm_ioc_new_dev? If I look at other subsystems like drm the common practice is either name the ioctl as VTPM_NEW_DEV_IOCTL or VTPM_IOC_NEW_DEV and not have suffix or postfix in the parameter struct. I would just copy that convention here. > Stefan /Jarkko -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
