On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 6:25 PM, Eli Cohen <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 09, 2015 at 06:11:49PM +0200, Matan Barak wrote:
>> >
>> > Like Haggai mentioned in the other response, checkpatch issues error
>> > on this claiming that ENOSYS is reserved to unavailable system calls.
>> > Is it applicable only for new implementations I am not sure. I don't
>> > have clear preference for either ENOSYS or EINAVL.
>>
>> I think it could break old applications:
>> err = extended_verb(the_first_extension_we_added);
>> if (err == ENOSYS)
>>       err = legacy_verb();
>> if (err)
>>     return err;
>
> Can you send a pointer to the code where this could happen?
>

This is a hypothetical application code that could break.

>>
>> Such applications used the first extension (that was added during the
>> addition of the extended verb) and when they realized it's not
>> supported, they dropped to the legacy verb. This change can now cause
>> the return of -EINVAL an early termination with an error.
>>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to