[virtio] Re: [virtio-comment] Re: [PATCH v10 03/10] admin: introduce group administration commands

[Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>]

On Mon, Feb 13 2023, Max Gurtovoy <mgurtovoy@nvidia.com> wrote:

> On 13/02/2023 14:42, Cornelia Huck wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 13 2023, Max Gurtovoy <mgurtovoy@nvidia.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> On 13/02/2023 10:16, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Feb 13, 2023 at 02:54:47AM +0200, Max Gurtovoy wrote:
>>>>>> For some system calls and library functions (e.g.,
>>>>>>           getpriority(2)), -1 is a valid return on success.  In such cases,
>>>>>>           a successful return can be distinguished from an error return by
>>>>>>           setting errno to zero before the call, and then, if the call
>>>>>>           returns a status that indicates that an error may have occurred,
>>>>>>           checking to see if errno has a nonzero value.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Description is already good enough to describe what they are.
>>>>>>> Can we please drop Linux wording?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But why should we? It's where 22 comes from so this way people are not
>>>>>> wondering about the value, and it's somewhat helpful for Linux
>>>>>> developers.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I also think we should not mention Linux. I don't think it's mentioned
>>>>> currently in the spec and no good reason to do so now.
>>>>
>>>> But we do: fuse, input at least both do.
>>>>
>>>>> Also value of 22 is not mandatory for this EINVAL status code. It can be
>>>>> just 1 (the first number after the OK status).
>>>>
>>>> 22 makes it a tiny bit easier for kvm. So why not.
>>>
>>> Because people comment on that in the review :) and because a
>>> specification should be OS independent.
>>> 22 might be EINVAL in Linux but a success in MyOS is my lucky number is 22.
>>>
>>> not a big issue for me, but I prefer to have a cleaner spec than maybe
>>> simplify something in a very specific OS.
>> 
>> Well, my take is:
>> - we have to pick *something*
>> - using EINVAL == 22 is very convenient for one of the most common (the
>>    most common?) implementors
>> - noting that we're trying to follow what Linux uses makes it clear what
>>    to pick for any new return codes
>> 
>
> Can we agree on 22 without mentioning Linux ?

See my third point above: we want people to be aware why we chose 22, so
any new values will match up as well.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that 
generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php