On Wednesday 21 June 2006 13:58, John-Mark Gurney wrote: > Alan Cox wrote this message on Wed, Jun 21, 2006 at 12:44 -0500: > > John-Mark Gurney wrote: > > > > >Konstantin Belousov wrote this message on Wed, Jun 21, 2006 at 12:59 +0000: > > > > > >> Modified files: > > >> lib/libc/sys mincore.2 > > >> sys/vm vm_mmap.c > > >> Log: > > >> Make the mincore(2) return ENOMEM when requested range is not fully > > >> mapped. > > > > > >Is this change to be posix compliant or something? ENOMEM seems like > > >the wrong error, or are we allocating memory? > > >#define ENOMEM 12 /* Cannot allocate memory */ > > > > > >the original EINVAL seems to me the correct one, as is commonly used > > >when the data passed in is incorrect... > > > > I looked at this when the patch was proposed. ENOMEM is the de facto > > standard error for this case. To the best of my knowledge, there is no > > officially-sanctioned specification for mincore(2). > > Could you please provide a reference to this de facto standard error > as in other places where ENOMEM is used for such an error?
NetBSD and Linux were the examples given on the thread in [EMAIL PROTECTED] Check the archives. -- John Baldwin _______________________________________________ cvs-all@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"