On Wed, May 7, 2025 at 7:52 AM Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Introduction paragraph to the ioctl numbers table states that only > ioctls in ancient Linux kernel version (v2.6.31) for x86 arch are > listed. This is inaccurate as the table also lists ioctls from non-x86 > archs and the kernel is continously developed (currently in v6.x). > > Update the paragraph accordingly. > > Signed-off-by: Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@xxxxxxxxx> > --- > Documentation/userspace-api/ioctl/ioctl-number.rst | 5 ++--- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/Documentation/userspace-api/ioctl/ioctl-number.rst b/Documentation/userspace-api/ioctl/ioctl-number.rst > index 83e5d2abdad694..51269ff250882f 100644 > --- a/Documentation/userspace-api/ioctl/ioctl-number.rst > +++ b/Documentation/userspace-api/ioctl/ioctl-number.rst > @@ -62,9 +62,8 @@ Following this convention is good because: > (5) When following the convention, the driver code can use generic > code to copy the parameters between user and kernel space. > > -This table lists ioctls visible from user land for Linux/x86. It contains > -most drivers up to 2.6.31, but I know I am missing some. There has been > -no attempt to list non-X86 architectures or ioctls from drivers/staging/. > +This table lists ioctls visible from userland for Linux version 6.x+, > +excluding ones from drivers/staging/. It is probably best to avoid mentioning any version information at all. Lukas > > ==== ===== ======================================================= ================================================================ > Code Seq# Include File Comments > > base-commit: b91a0cbb6f27ee499e376091e8c8c0ddfd69103c > -- > An old man doll... just what I always wanted! - Clara >
