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

[Ross Lagerwall <ross.lagerwall@citrix.com>]

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.

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

--
Ross Lagerwall