lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Dec]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] tty: Remove dead termiox code
    From
    Date
    On 08. 12. 20, 12:13, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
    > On Fri, Dec 04, 2020 at 09:20:39AM +0100, Jiri Slaby wrote:
    >>>>> Delete this dead code; but leave the definition of struct termiox in the
    >>>>> UAPI headers intact.
    >>>>
    >>>> I am thinking -- can/should we mark the structure as deprecated so that
    >>>> userspace stops using it eventually?
    >>>
    >>> If it doesn't do anything, how can userspace even use it today? :)
    >>
    >> Well, right. I am in favor to remove it, BUT: what if someone tries that
    >> ioctl and bails out if EINVAL is returned. I mean: if they define a local
    >> var of that struct type and pass it to the ioctl, we would break the build
    >> by removing the struct completely. Even if the code didn't do anything
    >> useful, it still could be built. So is this very potential breakage OK?
    >
    > Um, we do guarantee a stable ABI. We have never guaranteed that all old
    > crappy code will continue to compile, although we avoid gratious
    > breakage. And assuming there ever was code using termiox (which I'm not
    > sure about to start with) it will surely have some form of feature
    > check, and I think we are better off with that feature check not
    > detecting the presence as that would be completely pointless.
    >
    > Or in short: by keeping the uapi definition we do userspace software a
    > disfavor.

    OK, even better. I will remove it once I get to it (if noone beats me to
    it, of course).

    thanks,
    --
    js
    suse labs

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2020-12-08 12:24    [W:6.742 / U:0.088 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site