On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 07:24:46PM +0200, Richard Cochran wrote:
> On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 10:25:55PM +0800, Dong Zhu wrote:
> > Thanks for your pointing out my mistakes of CodingStyle.
> >
> > > > struct hwtstamp_config {
> > > >+ int rw;
> >
> > My initial idea was that the type of rw should be enum like tx_type, but I
> > am
> > not sure whther it is necessary to define a new enum, if this patch could
> > be accpeted I will ask someone about the rw. At that time I will change
> > the type of rw to bool or define a new enum, then convert the if to
> > switch if necessary.
>
> You cannot add any new field at all. That would break a userland ABI.
>
Thanks for your info Richard.
Can I use the 'flags' which members of hwtstamp_config to judge the
ioctl request instead ? If not could you plz give me a new way to
resolve this issue ?
Thanks a lot !
--
Best Regards,
Dong Zhu
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
