Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 13:25:39 +0300 From: Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@FreeBSD.org> To: Yar Tikhiy <yar@comp.chem.msu.su> Cc: arch@FreeBSD.org, Andre Oppermann <andre@FreeBSD.org>, jlemon@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: changing EINVAL for SIOCSIFCAP to something else Message-ID: <20060227102539.GZ55275@cell.sick.ru> In-Reply-To: <20060227102029.GK6435@comp.chem.msu.su> References: <20060227083815.GW55275@cell.sick.ru> <20060227091417.GF6435@comp.chem.msu.su> <20060227083815.GW55275@cell.sick.ru> <4402C09C.C3FB0064@freebsd.org> <20060227093431.GX55275@cell.sick.ru> <20060227094458.GH6435@comp.chem.msu.su> <20060227100031.GY55275@cell.sick.ru> <20060227102029.GK6435@comp.chem.msu.su>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Feb 27, 2006 at 01:20:30PM +0300, Yar Tikhiy wrote: Y> > Y> > Y> I'm afraid that this is a case when EINVAL is used properly: an Y> > Y> > Y> argument to ioctl doesn't make sense to a particular device. It's Y> > Y> > Y> true that EINVAL may be abused in other places though. I wish each Y> > Y> > Y> EINVAL being returned to the userland were accompanied by log(). Y> > Y> > Y> > Y> > I don't agree. EINVAL can logically fit to almost any error condition. We Y> > Y> > should fine error codes fitting better. If "ioctl doesn't make sense to a Y> > Y> > particular device", then we should say "Operation not supported by device", Y> > Y> > which is ENODEV. Y> > Y> Y> > Y> You see, it isn't ioctl itself that doesn't make sense to the device, Y> > Y> it's a single argument, ifr_reqcap. That was my point. Of course, Y> > Y> > Yes. The ioctl is correct, that's why we do not return ENOTTY. The Y> > argument is correct, that's why we do not return EINVAL. The argument Y> > is not applicable to this device, that's why I suggest to use ENODEV. Y> Y> This interpretation sounds fair to me. Did you look at other cases Y> when ENODEV was returned? How consistent were they with this one? In network code only in if_setlladdr() if the device doesn't have link level address at all. In many places throughout the kernel, in most cases close to the description. AFAIK, EINVAL is a correct choice, when argument is incorrect, for example its length differs to the expected. -- Totus tuus, Glebius. GLEBIUS-RIPN GLEB-RIPE
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060227102539.GZ55275>