On Mon, Feb 2, 2026, at 17:45, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 02, 2026 at 12:59:03PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>
> I think .compat_ioctl would be cleaner frankly. Just look at
> all the ifdefery. And who knows what broken-ness userspace
> comes up with with this approach. Better use the standard approach.
Sent now.
I'm not sure it's much better because there is quite a bit of
code duplication, and reducing that would be a larger rework.
It may be best to hold off on patch 2 for the coming merge window
since the compat ioctl code has apparently always been broken for
x86 here.
I hope we can at least get patch 1/2 merged along with the
new code though, otherwise it would get a lot harder to sort
it out properly, with the v2 struct members overlapping the
old padding fields.
Arnd
