Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 21 Mar 2002 04:19:15 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 21 Mar 2002 04:19:06 -0500 Received: from parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk ([195.92.249.252]:5392 "EHLO www.linux.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 21 Mar 2002 04:18:58 -0500 Message-ID: <3C99A54D.1050206@mandrakesoft.com> Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 04:18:05 -0500 From: Jeff Garzik User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.8) Gecko/20020214 X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Oliver Neukum CC: Axel Kittenberger , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Marcelo Tosatti Subject: Re: Patch, forward release() return values to the close() call In-Reply-To: <200203210747.IAA25949@merlin.gams.co.at> <3C99997C.6030202@mandrakesoft.com> <16nyaE-1ala7MC@fmrl01.sul.t-online.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Oliver Neukum wrote: >On Thursday 21 March 2002 09:27, Jeff Garzik wrote: > >>Whoops, my apologies. The patch looks ok to me. >> >>I read your text closely and the patch not close enough. As I said, it >>is indeed wrong for a device driver to fail f_op->release(), "fail" >>being defined as leaving fd state lying around, assuming that the system >>will fail the fput(). >> >>But your patch merely propagates a return value, not change behavior, >>which seems sane to me. >> > >Hi, > >close() does not directly map to release(). >If you want your device to return error >information reliably, you need to implement flush(). > Agreed. I still think propagating f_op->release's return value is a good idea, though. Jeff - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/