lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [Jan]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: 2.4.0 + iproute2
Andi Kleen wrote:
> Configuring a complex subsystem like CBQ which has dozens of parameters
> with only a single ed'esque error message (EINVAL) when something goes
> wrong is just bad.

The underlying problem is of course that all those sanity checks should
be done in user space, not in the kernel.

(See also ftp://icaftp.epfl.ch/pub/people/almesber/slides/tmp-tc.ps.gz
The bitching starts on slide 11, some ideas for fixing the problem on
slide 16, but heed the warning on slide 15.)

Besides that, I agree that we have far too many EINVALs in the kernel.
Maybe we should just record file name and line number of the EINVAL
in *current and add an eh?(2) system call ;-)

- Werner

--
_________________________________________________________________________
/ Werner Almesberger, ICA, EPFL, CH Werner.Almesberger@epfl.ch /
/_IN_N_032__Tel_+41_21_693_6621__Fax_+41_21_693_6610_____________________/
-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:23    [W:0.120 / U:0.628 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site