* Dong Jia Shi <bjsdj...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> [2017-02-21 15:36:23 +0800]:
[...]
> > > +static int vfio_ccw_sch_probe(struct subchannel *sch)
> > > +{
> > > + struct pmcw *pmcw = &sch->schib.pmcw;
> > > + struct vfio_ccw_private *private;
> > > + int ret;
> > > +
> > > + if (pmcw->qf) {
> > > + dev_warn(&sch->dev, "vfio: ccw: do not support QDIO: %s\n",
> >
> > s/do/does/
> >
> Ok.
>
> > > + dev_name(&sch->dev));
> > > + return -ENOTTY;
> >
> > Is -ENOTTY the right return code here? -EINVAL?
> >
> Ok. Think it again. -EINVAL makes more sense. It's like:
> "hey, I know it's an I/O subchannel, but not the kind we support".
>
Or -ENOTSUPP ?
> > > + }
> > > +
[...]
--
Dong Jia
