Hi! > > If I remember right it's POSIX requirement to return ENOMEM in this case > > and EINVAL sometimes slips in into kernel arch specific memory > > management code. > > > > Citing POSIX: > > > > [ENOMEM] > > MAP_FIXED was specified, and the range [addr,addr+len) exceeds that > > allowed for the address space of a process; > > > > It also says: > > [EINVAL] > The addr argument (if MAP_FIXED was specified) or off is not a multiple > of the page size as returned by sysconf(), or is considered invalid by > the implementation. > > "addr" used in testcase (HIGH_ADDR) is large enough for implementation to > reject it without even looking at len and range it would occupy. > Wouldn't this fit the EINVAL description too?
My view on this is that you have to take the more specific errors into consideration first otherwise there is no need to define them in the first place and you can return the most generic errors in all applicable cases. But given that interpreting POSIX is like interpreting religious texts (POSIX it cryptic, POSIX contains logical errors and people tend to quarrel about smallest things) I'm open to any reasonable solution we can all agree on (so we can move on to more important things to test). -- Cyril Hrubis chru...@suse.cz ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Slashdot TV. Video for Nerds. Stuff that matters. http://tv.slashdot.org/ _______________________________________________ Ltp-list mailing list Ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list
