From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Feb 27 09:34:51 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: arch@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F382816A420; Mon, 27 Feb 2006 09:34:50 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from glebius@FreeBSD.org) Received: from cell.sick.ru (cell.sick.ru [217.72.144.68]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFB2543D67; Mon, 27 Feb 2006 09:34:46 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from glebius@FreeBSD.org) Received: from cell.sick.ru (glebius@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cell.sick.ru (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id k1R9YWDN006553 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 27 Feb 2006 12:34:32 +0300 (MSK) (envelope-from glebius@FreeBSD.org) Received: (from glebius@localhost) by cell.sick.ru (8.13.3/8.13.1/Submit) id k1R9YVJv006552; Mon, 27 Feb 2006 12:34:31 +0300 (MSK) (envelope-from glebius@FreeBSD.org) X-Authentication-Warning: cell.sick.ru: glebius set sender to glebius@FreeBSD.org using -f Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 12:34:31 +0300 From: Gleb Smirnoff To: Andre Oppermann , Yar Tikhiy Message-ID: <20060227093431.GX55275@cell.sick.ru> References: <20060227083815.GW55275@cell.sick.ru> <20060227091417.GF6435@comp.chem.msu.su> <20060227083815.GW55275@cell.sick.ru> <4402C09C.C3FB0064@freebsd.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060227091417.GF6435@comp.chem.msu.su> <4402C09C.C3FB0064@freebsd.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i Cc: arch@FreeBSD.org, yar@FreeBSD.org, jlemon@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: changing EINVAL for SIOCSIFCAP to something else X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 09:34:51 -0000 Andre, Yar, On Mon, Feb 27, 2006 at 10:04:28AM +0100, Andre Oppermann wrote: A> > I prefer this variant: A> > A> > if (ifp->if_ioctl == NULL) A> > return (ENOTTY); A> > if (ifr->ifr_reqcap & ~ifp->if_capabilities) A> > return (ENODEV); A> > A> > Any objections? A> A> I don't think ENOTTY is appropriate here even though the comment to this A> error code would fit. But the define still says no TTY which is totally A> unrelated and confusing. It contains a confusing word "tty", but it means "Inappropriate ioctl for device". This error code is used in many places throughout the kernel. We already have some ENOTTY returns in src/sys/net. Y> I'm afraid that this is a case when EINVAL is used properly: an Y> argument to ioctl doesn't make sense to a particular device. It's Y> true that EINVAL may be abused in other places though. I wish each Y> EINVAL being returned to the userland were accompanied by log(). I don't agree. EINVAL can logically fit to almost any error condition. We should fine error codes fitting better. If "ioctl doesn't make sense to a particular device", then we should say "Operation not supported by device", which is ENODEV. -- Totus tuus, Glebius. GLEBIUS-RIPN GLEB-RIPE