From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Tim Deegan <tim@xen.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xenpaging: unify return value in nominate
	and evict
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2012 10:36:51 +0000
Message-ID: <20120130103651.GD96325@ocelot.phlegethon.org>
References: <ebc68ae15103061fa554.1327607777@probook.site>
	<20120130095129.GC96325@ocelot.phlegethon.org>
	<20120130102412.GA9935@aepfle.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20120130102412.GA9935@aepfle.de>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
To: Olaf Hering <olaf@aepfle.de>
Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

At 11:24 +0100 on 30 Jan (1327922652), Olaf Hering wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 30, Tim Deegan wrote:
> 
> > I don't think EAGAIN is the right thing to return here.  There's no
> > reason to think that retrying an invalid GFN will work next time. 
> > 
> > I'd be happy for these cases all to return the same code, but maybe
> > EINVAL would be a better choice. 
> 
> EINVAL is returned by upper layers already. I think both nominate and
> evict should return EBUSY in case of failure, this is most likely unique
> enough to mean "request reached target function, and failed.".

Fair enough; EBUSY will do.

Tim.