Egbert Eich writes: > Non of the patches that I've posted had problems with backward compatibility. > At least not across the kernel/user space interface. > Originally I had one that wasn't however that had been fixed before > I put patches into the fd.o bugzilla.
No, your patches originally changed the size of the drm_map_t, and added a drm32_map_t which was a different size from the old 32-bit drm_map_t. That and the fact that I found your patch impossible to follow was why I did my version. Now you have a kernel drm_map_t which is different from the user drm_map_t. I think this has the potential to be immensely confusing to people. If the kernel needs an internal data structure to keep information about maps, that's fine, but it should have a different name. Paul. ------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles, informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click -- _______________________________________________ Dri-devel mailing list Dri-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
