On 03/30/2015 08:54 AM, Michael Ellerman wrote: > 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.
OK. Will do. Thanks, C. _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev