Re: [patch] aio: add per task aio wait event condition

That sounds like a programming error, don't you think?  Maybe
returning EINVAL is the right approach?

Maybe. I think I'd prefer to be permissive and queue as much as possible, but it's not a strong preference. Returning EINVAL seems ok, too.

- z
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• References:
  • RE: [patch] aio: add per task aio wait event condition
    • From: "Chen, Kenneth W" <[email protected]>
  • Re: [patch] aio: add per task aio wait event condition
    • From: Zach Brown <[email protected]>
  • Re: [patch] aio: add per task aio wait event condition
    • From: Jeff Moyer <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH 2 of 4] Introduce i386 fibril scheduling
• Next by Date: Re: [PATCH 1/1] filesystem: Disk Errors at boot-time caused by probe of partitions
• Previous by thread: Re: [patch] aio: add per task aio wait event condition
• Next by thread: Re: [patch] aio: streamline read events after woken up
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]