Re: new errno ?

2018-07-08 Thread Warner Losh
On Sat, Jul 7, 2018, 11:43 AM Jason Thorpe wrote: > > > On Jul 6, 2018, at 2:49 PM, Eitan Adler wrote: > > For those interested in some of the history: > https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers/2003-May/000791.html > > > ...and the subsequent thread went just as I expected it might.

Re: new errno ?

2018-07-07 Thread Thor Lancelot Simon
The DOMAIN and RANGE errno values are not really used outside floating-point code, and are...conceptually appropriate...to many other kinds of problems. Thor On Fri, Jul 06, 2018 at 03:59:12PM -0700, Jason Thorpe wrote: > > > > On Jul 6, 2018, at 2:49 PM, Eitan Adler wrote: > > > > For those

Re: new errno ?

2018-07-07 Thread Robert Elz
Date:Fri, 6 Jul 2018 13:46:42 -0600 From:Warner Losh Message-ID: | Poul-Henning added it to differentiate between potentially valid but not in | this combo (EINVAL or EFAULT) and args that are clearly programming errors | (EDOOFUS), but in code that couldn't

Re: new errno ?

2018-07-07 Thread Warner Losh
On Fri, Jul 6, 2018, 2:10 PM Greg Troxel wrote: > > Phil Nelson writes: > > > Hello, > > > > In working on the 802.11 refresh, I ran into a new errno code from > FreeBSD: > > > > #define EDOOFUS 88 /* Programming error */ > &

Re: new errno ?

2018-07-07 Thread Jason Thorpe
> On Jul 6, 2018, at 2:49 PM, Eitan Adler wrote: > > For those interested in some of the history: > https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers/2003-May/000791.html > ...and the subsequent thread went just as

Re: new errno ?

2018-07-06 Thread Eitan Adler
On Fri, 6 Jul 2018 at 12:29, Phil Nelson wrote: > > On Friday 06 July 2018 12:09:55 Greg Troxel wrote: > > I might just map it to EFAULT or EINVAL. > > I like this suggestion. EFAULT For those interested in some of the history:

Re: new errno ?

2018-07-06 Thread Phil Nelson
On Friday 06 July 2018 12:09:55 Greg Troxel wrote: >  I might just map it to EFAULT or EINVAL. I like this suggestion. EFAULT --Phil

Re: new errno ?

2018-07-06 Thread Greg Troxel
Phil Nelson writes: > Hello, > > In working on the 802.11 refresh, I ran into a new errno code from > FreeBSD: > > #define EDOOFUS 88 /* Programming error */ > > Shall we add this one? (Most likely with a different number since 88 is

Re: new errno ?

2018-07-06 Thread Christos Zoulas
In article <201807061021.35171.p...@netbsd.org>, Phil Nelson wrote: >Hello, > >In working on the 802.11 refresh, I ran into a new errno code from FreeBSD: > >#define EDOOFUS 88 /* Programming error */ > >Shall we add this one? (Most lik

new errno ?

2018-07-06 Thread Phil Nelson
Hello, In working on the 802.11 refresh, I ran into a new errno code from FreeBSD: #define EDOOFUS 88 /* Programming error */ Shall we add this one? (Most likely with a different number since 88 is taken in the NetBSD errno.h.) I could use EPROTO instead