[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160119090736.GF7192@pali>
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 10:07:36 +0100
From: Pali Rohár <pali.rohar@...il.com>
To: Jean Delvare <jdelvare@...e.de>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] dmi: Make dmi_walk and dmi_walk_early return real
error codes
On Tuesday 19 January 2016 10:03:03 Jean Delvare wrote:
> Hi Pali,
>
> On Tue, 19 Jan 2016 09:36:33 +0100, Pali Rohár wrote:
> > On Tuesday 19 January 2016 08:54:26 Jean Delvare wrote:
> > > > @@ -978,11 +978,11 @@ int dmi_walk(void (*decode)(const struct dmi_header *, void *),
> > > > u8 *buf;
> > > >
> > > > if (!dmi_available)
> > > > - return -1;
> > > > + return -ENOENT;
> > >
> > > -ENOSYS would seem more appropriate?
> >
> > IIRC -ENOSYS is for non implemented syscalls.
>
> I can see a lot of -ENOSYS in include/linux/*.h returned by stubs when
> a specific subsystem is not included. Not related to syscalls at all.
> This is what lead to my suggestion.
https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/8/22/492
--
Pali Rohár
pali.rohar@...il.com
Powered by blists - more mailing lists