On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 12:43:14PM +0100, Denys Vlasenko wrote: > On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 8:35 AM, Cyrill Gorcunov <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 03:03:27PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > >> I don't have a great idea for how to work around this, unfortunately. > >> Ideally we'd increment some kind of version counter or use an > >> extension mechanism rather than shoving ss into a field that used to > >> be padding. > > > > fwiw currently we're passing zero in this __pad0 (replying to your > > previous email, so we can workaround in the kernel assuming zero > > as a special case, not that good but better than nothing). > > Special-casing zero sounds not that bad to me. > It can be removed after a few years - just don't forget > to document it in a good comment: why we have special > case? What software required it? > In which version of that software the need to have this hack > was eliminated?
To be fair, such special case would be ideal for us, so that if noone object against such hack, i would cook a patch. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
