Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 21 May 1999 09:58:47 +0100 (BST)
From:      Doug Rabson <dfr@nlsystems.com>
To:        Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>
Cc:        nick.hibma@jrc.it, current@FreeBSD.ORG, dfr@FreeBSD.ORG, hibma@skylink.it, peter@netplex.com.au
Subject:   Re: priorities
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSF.4.05.9905210957590.509-100000@herring.nlsystems.com>
In-Reply-To: <199905210842.SAA06293@godzilla.zeta.org.au>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 21 May 1999, Bruce Evans wrote:

> >> How do you guarantuee that the errno is positive? Add an assert
> >> somewhere, like checking whether ENXIO >= PRIORITY_FAIL?
> >
> >They just are positive and have always been positive :-)
> >
> >Changing that (making errnos negative) would break so much code I don't
> >even want to think about it.
> 
> >From errno.h:
> 
> #ifdef KERNEL
> /* pseudo-errors returned inside kernel to modify return to process */
> #define	ERESTART	(-1)		/* restart syscall */
> #define	EJUSTRETURN	(-2)		/* don't modify regs, just return */
> #define	ENOIOCTL	(-3)		/* ioctl not handled by this layer */
> #endif

They aren't real errnos, just signals to the kernel.

--
Doug Rabson				Mail:  dfr@nlsystems.com
Nonlinear Systems Ltd.			Phone: +44 181 442 9037




To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.05.9905210957590.509-100000>