On Mon, 2015-03-30 at 08:37 +0200, Cedric Le Goater wrote: > On 03/30/2015 04:05 AM, Michael Ellerman wrote: > > On Fri, 2015-03-27 at 17:39 +0100, Cédric Le Goater wrote: > >> OPAL has its own list of return codes. The patch provides a translation > >> of such codes in errnos for the opal_sensor_read call, and possibly > >> others if needed. > >> > >> + case OPAL_UNSUPPORTED: return -ENOSYS; > > > > You shouldn't use ENOSYS here, that should only ever mean "no such syscall", > > otherwise you get very confusing results like read() returning ENOSYS. > > Indeed. How about ENODEV then ?
That can also be confusing from userspace. I think it's probably best just to use EIO, as far as userspace is concerned if the kernel lets it call an unsupported OPAL routine that is more or less a kernel bug. cheers _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
