Darren Reed wrote:
> Garrett D'Amore wrote:
>
>
>> The IOCPARM_MASK removal was covered by PSARC case 2008/343. I'm
>> thinking that MAXIOCBSZ is not a documented API, isn't used *anywhere*
>> outside of the files I'm removing it from here (according to Google at
>> least) -- apart from automatically generated Perl and Python files
>> (generated from the header files), so I think I can probably get away
>> without an ARC case for it. If anyone else on the recipient list feels
>> different, let me know -- I can file an auto-approval case pretty
>> trivially. (Mostly I didn't file the case just to avoid the 1 week
>> timeout that such normally incurs, particularly since this seems pretty
>> obvious at this point.)
>>
>>
>>
>
> I think a fast track would be worthwhile, especially since you're
> increasing the structure size allowed for ioctls which really does
> mean that you're changing an interface. Auto-approved seems
> to be appropriate?
>
Actually, I'm changing the size *allowed*. I'm changing the fact that
the attached data will arrive as a single contiguous mblk, rather than
broken across several smaller linked mblks.
That said if you still believe a self-review case should be filed, then
I'll do it.
-- Garrett
> Darren
>
> _______________________________________________
> networking-discuss mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-code mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/opensolaris-code
