Re: [PATCH 06/25] mtd: move ioctl32 code to mtdchar.c

[Jörn Engel <joern@wohnheim.fh-wedel.de>]

On Tue, 8 November 2005 11:10:27 -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Jörn Engel <joern@wohnheim.fh-wedel.de> writes:
> 
> > Moving crap over to mtdchar.c is a good thing.  Complete removal of
> > mtdchar.c might be even better, but at least the crap is relatively
> > self-contained now.
> 
> Agreed moving the compat_ioctl to mtdchar now that it is possible
> sounds good.
> 
> I can see that argument with respect to mtdblock.  But why would
> removal of mtdchar be a good thing?  It is a simple raw access
> interface.   For those whose flash parts are too small for a filesystem
> or when you are doing things that you can't do with a filesystem
> like making or checking it you need something like mtd char.  For
> embedded folks who don't care you can just compile it out.

mtdchar.c is one of the worst drivers inside the kernel.  The concept
of having a simple char device driver for flash may have its charm,
but the actual implementation is horrible.  And things like the
read-only devices are even unfixable.

mtdblock.c, while being quite a bit more complicated, does not require
a ton of ioctls, will not confuse users with minor number 7 actually
being device number 3 and magically being read-only despite unix
permissions and hardware properties.  Plus, it is just a file.

Can you name a few examples, where mtdchar.c makes sense?  I've found
it to be quite useless.

Jörn

-- 
A quarrel is quickly settled when deserted by one party; there is
no battle unless there be two.
-- Seneca
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/