We still have all the ioctls to fix from lack of shared code. So it
definitely has tradeoffs both ways
> Eventually, we can talk about ways of making the tty layer have more
> support for this kind of thing, so that (for example) async_icounter is
> in the struct tty, and the ioctl handling is done in tty_ioctl.c. The
> difference is, that would be a cleanly implemented change. What we're
That to me makes a hell of a lot more sense.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/