Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 10:58:21 -0700 From: John-Mark Gurney <gurney_j@resnet.uoregon.edu> To: Alan Cox <alc@cs.rice.edu> Cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, Konstantin Belousov <kib@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/lib/libc/sys mincore.2 src/sys/vm vm_mmap.c Message-ID: <20060621175821.GB82074@funkthat.com> In-Reply-To: <44998562.6080705@cs.rice.edu> References: <200606211259.k5LCx5as082227@repoman.freebsd.org> <20060621172849.GA82074@funkthat.com> <44998562.6080705@cs.rice.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Alan Cox wrote this message on Wed, Jun 21, 2006 at 12:44 -0500:
> John-Mark Gurney wrote:
>
> >Konstantin Belousov wrote this message on Wed, Jun 21, 2006 at 12:59 +0000:
> >
> >> Modified files:
> >> lib/libc/sys mincore.2
> >> sys/vm vm_mmap.c
> >> Log:
> >> Make the mincore(2) return ENOMEM when requested range is not fully
> >> mapped.
> >
> >Is this change to be posix compliant or something? ENOMEM seems like
> >the wrong error, or are we allocating memory?
> >#define ENOMEM 12 /* Cannot allocate memory */
> >
> >the original EINVAL seems to me the correct one, as is commonly used
> >when the data passed in is incorrect...
>
> I looked at this when the patch was proposed. ENOMEM is the de facto
> standard error for this case. To the best of my knowledge, there is no
> officially-sanctioned specification for mincore(2).
Could you please provide a reference to this de facto standard error
as in other places where ENOMEM is used for such an error?
--
John-Mark Gurney Voice: +1 415 225 5579
"All that I will do, has been done, All that I have, has not."
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060621175821.GB82074>