On Sat, Jul 7, 2018, 11:43 AM Jason Thorpe <thor...@me.com> wrote: > > > On Jul 6, 2018, at 2:49 PM, Eitan Adler <li...@eitanadler.com> 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. Sigh. > > Anyway... in what situations is this absurd error code used in the 802.11 > code? >
ENOTTY is best for how 802.11 uses it. Warner EFAULT seems wrong because it means something very specific. Actually, > that brings me to a bigger point... rather than having a generic error code > for "lulz I could have panic'd here, heh", why not simply return an error > code appropriate for the situation that would have otherwise resulted in > calling panic()? There are many to choose from :-) > > -- thorpej > >
