[lkml]   [2002]   [Mar]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Patch, forward release() return values to the close() call
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.
>close() does not directly map to release().
>If you want your device to return error
>information reliably, you need to implement flush().


I still think propagating f_op->release's return value is a good idea,


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:25    [W:0.070 / U:10.772 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site