From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:54051 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965184AbcAZPA1 (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Jan 2016 10:00:27 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/7] quota: add new quotactl Q_XGETNEXTQUOTA To: Jan Kara References: <1453487136-12681-1-git-send-email-sandeen@redhat.com> <1453487136-12681-3-git-send-email-sandeen@redhat.com> <20160126125710.GA23820@quack.suse.cz> Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com From: Eric Sandeen Message-ID: <56A78A09.5080307@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 09:00:25 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20160126125710.GA23820@quack.suse.cz> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 1/26/16 6:57 AM, Jan Kara wrote: > On Fri 22-01-16 12:25:31, Eric Sandeen wrote: >> Q_XGETNEXTQUOTA is exactly like Q_XGETQUOTA, except that it >> will return quota information for the id equal to or greater >> than the id requested. In other words, if the requested id has >> no quota, the command will return quota information for the >> next higher id which does have a quota set. If no higher id >> has an active quota, -ESRCH is returned. > > Actually, is -ESRCH the right return value? It seems XFS traditionally > returns -ENOENT when id doesn't exist. So that would look more logical to > me. Hm, I was just going by the quotactl manpage, TBH, which says: ESRCH No disc quota is found for the indicated user. But yes, you are right, it is ENOENT for xfs... argh. I suppose the quotactl manpage could use an update as well, then. At this point do you want me to update the patches & resend or do you want to fix that up too? :( I reference -ESRCH in comments too, I think. -Eric