On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 02:56:17PM +0100, Martyn Welch wrote: > On 13/05/13 09:51, Dan Carpenter wrote: > > On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 09:16:00AM +0100, Martyn Welch wrote: > >> On 13/05/13 07:05, Wei Yongjun wrote: > >>> From: Wei Yongjun <yongjun_...@trendmicro.com.cn> > >>> > >>> Fix to return -ENOMEM in the resource alloc error handling > >>> case instead of 0, as done elsewhere in this function. > >>> > >> > >> Hi Wei, > >> > >> Thanks for your patch. As this is resource allocation rather than memory > >> allocation that is failing, would -EAGAIN not make more sense than -ENOMEM? > >> > > > > ENOMEM is better. EAGAIN is for when trylock() fails etc. In other > > words we are not allowed to block and someone is using the lock we > > need. > > > > ENOMEM just doesn't seem to describe the error very well. This error will be > triggered if no free VME windows are available for the driver to use - there > are typically 8 master and 8 slave windows provided in hardware. > > How about EBUSY (Device or resource busy)?
EBUSY would work. regards, dan carpenter -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
