> -----Original Message----- > From: Boris Ostrovsky [mailto:boris.ostrov...@oracle.com] > Sent: 09 February 2017 15:26 > To: Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com>; Paul Durrant > <paul.durr...@citrix.com> > Cc: xen-de...@lists.xenproject.org; Juergen Gross <jgr...@suse.com>; > linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org > Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/3] xen/privcmd: return -ENOSYS for > unimplemented IOCTLs > > > > On 02/09/2017 09:40 AM, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>>> On 09.02.17 at 15:17, <paul.durr...@citrix.com> wrote: > >> The code goes so far as to set the default return code to -ENOSYS but > >> then overrides this to -EINVAL in the switch() statement's default > >> case. > > > > If you already change this, isn't -ENOTTY the traditional way of > > indicating unsupported ioctls? > > In fact, a while ago David submitted a patch to do just that: > > https://lists.xenproject.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2016- > 08/msg00744.html > > but it never went anywhere. > > My question is whether anyone might be relying on current error return > behavior.
I doubt it. It's certainly not a safe thing to do anyway. I'll change to -ENOTTY in v2 of the patch. Paul > > > -boris _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
