Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Fri, 22 Sep 2000 08:40:45 +0200 | From | Abramo Bagnara <> | Subject | Re: [RFC] ioctl(2) return value |
| |
Alan Cox wrote: > > > I've looked Singe UNIX Specification, Version 2 and there this seems > > perfectly acceptable. > > > > I'd like very much to have some feedback to do the RightThing (tm). > > > > The alternative of course would be to add a result field inside struct > > passed by pointer to ioctl call. > > Linux doesnt care. If you want ALSA to run on SYS5 or BSD derived kernels you > should avoid returning anything but 0/error-code from ioctls. >
I'd like you clarify the reasons for this choice in these OS families.
Probably one of your gnomes knows it (I hope that this specific gnome is not in hibernation in this season :-)
-- Abramo Bagnara mailto:abramo@alsa-project.org
Opera Unica Via Emilia Interna, 140 Phone: +39.0546.656023 48014 Castel Bolognese (RA) - Italy Fax: +39.0546.656023
ALSA project is http://www.alsa-project.org sponsored by SuSE Linux http://www.suse.com
It sounds good! - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |