From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755190AbaHYK3g (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Aug 2014 06:29:36 -0400 Received: from atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz ([195.113.26.193]:52036 "EHLO atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755126AbaHYK3f (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Aug 2014 06:29:35 -0400 Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2014 12:29:32 +0200 From: Pavel Machek To: Andy Lutomirski Cc: "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" , Andy Whitcroft , Joe Perches , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] checkpatch.pl: New instances of ENOSYS are errors Message-ID: <20140825102932.GA5772@amd> References: <72714b6b69d00496d6e55453423c4070de292bf4.1408724662.git.luto@amacapital.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <72714b6b69d00496d6e55453423c4070de292bf4.1408724662.git.luto@amacapital.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri 2014-08-22 09:26:31, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > ENOSYS means that a nonexistent system call was called. We have a > bad habit of using it for things like invalid operations on > otherwise valid syscalls. We should avoid this in new code. Is it good idea? I mean, doing EINVAL for subcalls is pretty unhelpful. Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html