lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Mar]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Patch, forward release() return values to the close() call
On Thu, 21 Mar 2002, Jeff Garzik wrote:

> 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

Probably. Throwing away information without need is bad.

Regards
Oliver


-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:22    [W:0.037 / U:3.660 seconds]
©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site