[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <519F088C.1020509@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 14:28:28 +0800
From: Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
CC: davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [net-next RFC 2/8] macvtap: return -EBADFD when TUNGETIFF fails
On 05/23/2013 07:54 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 11:12:27AM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>> Tuntap return -EBADFD when TUNGETIFF fails, we should return the same value.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>
> Can you add some more comments on why this matters?
Just to keep compatibility for tuntap.
> Any userspace that cares will have to handle both, right?
Ideally the userspace should expect the same behavior for both tap and
macvtap.
Maybe we should just keep this.
>
>> ---
>> drivers/net/macvtap.c | 2 +-
>> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/macvtap.c b/drivers/net/macvtap.c
>> index 59e9605..ce1c72a 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/macvtap.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/macvtap.c
>> @@ -928,7 +928,7 @@ static long macvtap_ioctl(struct file *file, unsigned int cmd,
>> rcu_read_unlock_bh();
>>
>> if (!vlan)
>> - return -ENOLINK;
>> + return -EBADFD;
>>
>> ret = 0;
>> if (copy_to_user(&ifr->ifr_name, vlan->dev->name, IFNAMSIZ) ||
>> --
>> 1.7.1
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists