[Apologies if you see this message twice - I accidentially sent it in HTML format first time around and I am pretty sure LKML will eat it]
Hi, According to the SuS write() can not return ENOMEM, only ENOBUFS is allowed (surprisingly read() is allowed to use both ENOMEM and ENOBUFS): http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/000095399/functions/write.html Should we adjust sysfs write to follow the standard? -- Dmitry =================================================================== sysfs: write should return ENOBUFS According to SuS ENOMEM is not a valid return code for write(), ENOBUFS should be returned. Signed-off-by: Dmitry Torokhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- fs/sysfs/file.c | 2 +- 1 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) Index: work/fs/sysfs/file.c =================================================================== --- work.orig/fs/sysfs/file.c +++ work/fs/sysfs/file.c @@ -180,7 +180,7 @@ fill_write_buffer(struct sysfs_buffer * if (!buffer->page) buffer->page = (char *)get_zeroed_page(GFP_KERNEL); if (!buffer->page) - return -ENOMEM; + return -ENOBUFS; if (count >= PAGE_SIZE) count = PAGE_SIZE; - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
