[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180717065548.GA10961@kroah.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2018 08:55:48 +0200
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Todd Poynor <toddpoynor@...il.com>
Cc: devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, Zhongze Hu <frankhu@...omium.org>,
John Joseph <jnjoseph@...gle.com>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Simon Que <sque@...omium.org>,
Rob Springer <rspringer@...gle.com>,
Guenter Roeck <groeck@...omium.org>,
Todd Poynor <toddpoynor@...gle.com>,
Dmitry Torokhov <dtor@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/18] staging: gasket: sysfs mapping creation fixups
On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 02:14:27PM -0700, Todd Poynor wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 13, 2018 at 11:32 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman
> <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 13, 2018 at 10:58:03PM -0700, Todd Poynor wrote:
> >> From: Todd Poynor <toddpoynor@...gle.com>
> >>
> >> Return EBUSY for attempt to create a mapping already in use.
> >
> > Why?
>
> The existing code returns EINVAL which often means something bogus was
> requested, whereas EBUSY is sometimes used for requesting something
> already in use. If that's not an error typically returned in this
> situation I'm happy to drop it.
My "why" was rhetorical, please spell this out in the changelog text :)
thanks,
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists