On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 10:19:16AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > Honestly, I think this is the wrong way to go. > > All of this new complexity and messiness, just to remove a few > unimportant final cases? > > If somebody can't be bothered to convert a driver to > iter_read/iter_write, why would they be bothered to convert it to > read_uptr/write_uptr? > > And this messiness will stay around for decades. > > So let's not go down that path. > > If you want to do "splice() and kernel_read() requires read_iter" > (with a warning so that we find any cases), then that's fine. But > let's not add yet _another_ read type. > > Why did you care so much about sysctl, and why couldn't they use the iter ops?
I don't care at all. Based on our previous chat I assumed you wanted something like this. We might still need the uptr_t for setsockopt, though.
