From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from one.firstfloor.org (one.firstfloor.org [213.235.205.2]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3105CDDFF4 for ; Sat, 7 Jul 2007 05:33:22 +1000 (EST) Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2007 21:04:56 +0200 From: Andi Kleen To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge Subject: Re: Too verbose compat_ioctl messages? Message-ID: <20070706190456.GC8174@one.firstfloor.org> References: <468E6E33.3040000@zytor.com> <468E8B07.2030404@goop.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <468E8B07.2030404@goop.org> Cc: Linux Kernel Development , Linux/PPC Development , Andi Kleen , "H. Peter Anvin" , Geert Uytterhoeven , Hiroaki Fuse List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Fri, Jul 06, 2007 at 11:33:43AM -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > Andi Kleen wrote: > >"H. Peter Anvin" writes: > > > >>For one thing, it looks like we're returning the wrong thing (EINVAL > >>rather than ENOTTY) across the board. This was unfortunately a common > >>misunderstanding with non-tty-related ioctls in the early days of Linux. > >> > > > >ENOTTY is so excessively misnamed that it is actually surprising > >anybody ever got that "right" (for very small values of right i guess) > > > > But it *isn't* a typewriter. Most ioctls are not related to ttys in any way. -Andi