[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20171021005155.d65ded09654664f76f43e12f@kernel.org>
Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2017 00:51:55 +0900
From: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Anil S Keshavamurthy <anil.s.keshavamurthy@...el.com>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Ian McDonald <ian.mcdonald@...di.co.nz>,
Vlad Yasevich <vyasevich@...il.com>,
Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH -tip 1/5] kprobes: Use ENOTSUPP instead of ENOSYS
On Fri, 20 Oct 2017 10:57:22 +0200
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> * Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> > Use ENOTSUPP instead of ENOSYS because ENOSYS is reserved
> > only for invalid syscall number.
>
> Is this actually true? We use -ENOSYS in a ton of code in kernel/ already, not
> just for non-existing syscall number.
I got a warning from checkpatches.pl, also in include/uapi/asm-generic/errno.h,
/*
* This error code is special: arch syscall entry code will return
* -ENOSYS if users try to call a syscall that doesn't exist. To keep
* failures of syscalls that really do exist distinguishable from
* failures due to attempts to use a nonexistent syscall, syscall
* implementations should refrain from returning -ENOSYS.
*/
#define ENOSYS 38 /* Invalid system call number */
So, I decided not to use ENOSYS for this error.
Thank you,
>
> Ingo
--
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists