From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1161010AbXCAWQF (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Mar 2007 17:16:05 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1161002AbXCAWQE (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Mar 2007 17:16:04 -0500 Received: from gw.goop.org ([64.81.55.164]:38573 "EHLO mail.goop.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1161001AbXCAWQB (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Mar 2007 17:16:01 -0500 Message-ID: <45E7509E.7090000@goop.org> Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2007 14:15:58 -0800 From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.9 (X11/20070212) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alan CC: "Amit K. Arora" , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton , suparna@in.ibm.com, cmm@us.ibm.com, alex@clusterfs.com, suzuki@in.ibm.com Subject: Re: [RFC] Heads up on sys_fallocate() References: <20070117094658.GA17390@amitarora.in.ibm.com> <20070225022326.137b4875.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070301183445.GA7911@amitarora.in.ibm.com> <45E74238.3040606@goop.org> <20070301225855.24ecaba0@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <45E74E30.8080909@goop.org> <20070301231118.427544a4@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> In-Reply-To: <20070301231118.427544a4@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Alan wrote: > ENOSYS indicates quite different things and ENOTTY is also used for > syscalls. I still think ENOTTY is correct. > Yes, ENOSYS tends to me "operation flat out not support" rather than "not on this object". I think we can do better than ENOTTY though - ENOTSUP for example (modulo the confusion over EOPNOTSUPP). (You can tell the patch has very little real substance if we're arguing over errnos at this point :) J