Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Wed, 30 Jan 2019 07:10:49 -0600
From:   Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>
To:     Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>
Cc:     Joe Lawrence <joe.lawrence@redhat.com>,
        Alice Ferrazzi <alicef@alicef.me>, jeyu@kernel.org,
        jikos@kernel.org, mbenes@suse.cz, live-patching@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Alice Ferrazzi <alice.ferrazzi@miraclelinux.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] livepatch: core: Return ENOTSUPP instead of ENOSYS
Message-ID: <20190130131049.gnhge73xvh62p3gl@treble>
References: <20190126192630.6163-1-alicef@alicef.me>
 <20190128194943.GA18515@redhat.com>
 <20190129165054.vyi7n6in5v2omkpu@treble>
 <20190130124156.qjtbvrkjctu6wi62@pathway.suse.cz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20190130124156.qjtbvrkjctu6wi62@pathway.suse.cz>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 01:41:56PM +0100, Petr Mladek wrote:
> Hmm, the error code is passed to the syscall, for example:
> 
> + SYSCALL_DEFINE3(init_module
>   + load_module()
>     + do_init_module()
>       + do_one_initcall(mod->init);
> 
> I am not sure if we are allowed to return -ENOTSUPP (-524).
> It is defined in the internal include/linux/errno.h. There
> is the following commnent:
> 
> /*
>  * These should never be seen by user programs...
> 
> 
> 
> I tried to find a better alternative and found:
> 
> #define	EOPNOTSUPP	95	/* Operation not supported on transport endpoint */
> 
> 
> There is the following note in man errno:
> 
>        ENOTSUP         Operation not supported (POSIX.1)
> 
>        EOPNOTSUPP      Operation not supported on socket (POSIX.1)
> 		       (ENOTSUP and EOPNOTSUPP have the same value
> 		       on Linux, but according to POSIX.1 these error
> 		       values should be distinct.)
> 
> And it looks that -EOPNOTSUPP is used widely in many subsystes (not
> only network).

Yes, you are right.  It's confusing that ENOTSUPP and ENOTSUP are not
the same thing.  EOPNOTSUPP sounds good.

-- 
Josh