Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 13:07:46 -0500 From: Alan Cox <alc@cs.rice.edu> To: John-Mark Gurney <gurney_j@resnet.uoregon.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: <44998AF2.5090600@cs.rice.edu> In-Reply-To: <20060621175821.GB82074@funkthat.com> References: <200606211259.k5LCx5as082227@repoman.freebsd.org> <20060621172849.GA82074@funkthat.com> <44998562.6080705@cs.rice.edu> <20060621175821.GB82074@funkthat.com>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
John-Mark Gurney wrote: >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? > > > I don't understand the question. It is a de facto standard. So, there is no reference, like POSIX or the Open Group that can be cited. Can you restate the question?home | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?44998AF2.5090600>