lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Oct]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] alarmtimer: return EINVAL instead of ENOTSUPP if rtcdev doesn't exist
(10/17/13 1:05 PM), John Stultz wrote:
> On 10/14/2013 02:33 PM, kosaki.motohiro@gmail.com wrote:
>> From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
>>
>> Fedora Ruby maintainer reported latest Ruby doesn't work on Fedora Rawhide
>> on ARM. (http://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/9008)
>>
>> Because of, commit 1c6b39ad3f (alarmtimers: Return -ENOTSUPP if no
>> RTC device is present) intruduced to return ENOTSUPP when
>> clock_get{time,res} can't find a RTC device. However it is incorrect.
>>
>> Posix and Linux man pages agree that clock_gettime and clock_getres
>> should return EINVAL if clk_id argument is invalid. This is significant
>> different from timer_create API.
>>
>> This patch fixes it.
>
> Hrm... So I feel like there is a difference here. The clockid for
> CLOCK_BOOTTIME_ALARM and CLOCK_REALTIME_ALARM are both valid.
>
> Its just that they're not supported on this specific hardware because it
> apparently lacks a RTC that has told the system it can be used as a
> wakeup device (Its actually quite likely on the hardware that the RTC
> can be a wakeup device, but that the driver is probably setting the
> wakeup flag after the RTC registered - so there is probably a driver bug
> here too).
>
> So I feel like in this case EINVAL isn't quite right. I'll admit it is
> somewhat new behavior, because we haven't had any clockids before that
> were dependent on the particular hardware, they either existed in a
> kernel verison or didn't.
>
> Would updating the manpage be a better route?

Nope.

ENOTSUPP is not exported to userland. ENOTSUP (single P) and EOPNOTSUP is
valid errno (and they are same on linux), but ENOTSUPP is a kernel internal specific.

Moreover, I completely disagree your position. Both CLOCK_REALTIME_ALARM unsupported
kernel and ARM which doesn't support RTC should use the same error because application
need the same fallback.





\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-10-18 03:41    [W:0.053 / U:15.248 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site