Re: [PATCH] tools/libxl: Fix the errno

[Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>]

On Fri, 2015-03-20 at 16:02 +0000, Ross Lagerwall wrote:
> On 03/20/2015 11:15 AM, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > On Fri, 2015-03-20 at 11:03 +0000, Ian Campbell wrote:
> >> Do the new callers actually need the number of bytes read/written or was
> >> this just something which seemed like a good idea since it was in hand?
> >>
> >> If it isn't needed
> >
> > In fact, irrespective of the needs of the future callers lets go back to
> > the old semantics of errnoval for now, since it should be a quick and
> > easy patch, I think.
> >
> > Then if it is actually needed we can sort out the propagation of the
> > number of bytes read in a new patch as part of that series.
> >
> 
> Some indication of whether the number of bytes requested were actually 
> read is needed. Consider reading a struct of size X off the wire. The 
> caller needs to know whether the number of bytes requested was actually 
> was read or if they got an early EOF.

OK, so not actually the full number of bytes but just all vs. !all would
do? (it might be easier to massage that into the current interface)

> But in the meantime I will send a patch to fix restore the original 
> behavior for errnoval.

Thanks.

Ian.