linux-kernel - Re: [2.6.18-rc* PATCH RFC]: Correct ambiguous errno of aio

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <44F5BE36.10502@zabbo.net>
Date:	Wed, 30 Aug 2006 09:35:02 -0700
From:	Zach Brown <zab@...bo.net>
To:	yang.y.yi@...il.com
CC:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
	linux-aio <linux-aio@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: [2.6.18-rc* PATCH RFC]: Correct ambiguous errno of aio


> When I run ltp aio test case, for the operation OCB_CMD_FDSYNC and 
> IOCB_CMD_FSYNC, io_submit returns -1 and errno is EINVAL, perror's 
> output is "Invalid arguments", from the user's perspective, the 
> arguments are valid and the kernel also know it and progress the
> process to file operation of the filesystem actually, so I think
> ENOTSUP is more appropriate. Note ENOTSUP in the user space
> corresponds to EOPNOTSUPP in the kernel mode. For ENOTSUP, perror's
> output is "Function isn't implemented", obviously, it is a reasonable
> explanation about the execution error and not ambiguous.

This might have been a convincing argument when the interface was first
being written, but now we have to take into account that changing the
interface can break existing users.

That you prefer EOPNOTSUPP is not a compelling reason to break existing
setups, sorry.

- z
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/