From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: =?windows-1252?Q?Roger_Pau_Monn=E9?= <roger.pau@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH for-4.6 1/3] xen/x86/libxl: replace
 non-POSIX error codes used by PSR code
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2015 11:51:23 +0200
Message-ID: <55AF679B.5010401@citrix.com>
References: <1437494178-10654-1-git-send-email-roger.pau@citrix.com>
	<1437494178-10654-2-git-send-email-roger.pau@citrix.com>
	<55AE8B6D0200007800093BD1@prv-mh.provo.novell.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
Received: from mail6.bemta3.messagelabs.com ([195.245.230.39])
	by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <prvs=63841d76d=roger.pau@citrix.com>)
	id 1ZHqgS-0000FG-8X
	for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Wed, 22 Jul 2015 09:51:28 +0000
In-Reply-To: <55AE8B6D0200007800093BD1@prv-mh.provo.novell.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
Cc: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>, Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>, Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>, Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>, xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

El 21/07/15 a les 18.11, Jan Beulich ha escrit:
>>>> On 21.07.15 at 17:56, <roger.pau@citrix.com> wrote:
>> PSR was using EBADSLT and EUSERS which are not POSIX error codes, replace
>> them with EINVAL and EOVERFLOW respectively.
> 
> Considering that we use EINVAL for almost everything (well beyond
> parameter checking I'm afraid), I don't think using this value for
> something intended to yield a specific user mode error message is
> really a good choice. Looking at the two respective hypervisor side
> changes - how about e.g. using EDOM, EBADF, or ENXIO instead?

As suggested in a later email, replacing EBADSLT with ENOTSOCK seems
better here.

Roger.