[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH] vfio: VFIO Driver core framework
From: |
Scott Wood |
Subject: |
Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH] vfio: VFIO Driver core framework |
Date: |
Thu, 17 Nov 2011 14:56:33 -0600 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) |
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 01:22:17PM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-11-16 at 11:52 -0500, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 03:10:56PM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > What would be the return value if somebody tried to unmask an edge one?
> > Should that be documented here? -ENOSPEC?
>
> I would assume EINVAL or EFAULT since the user is providing an invalid
> argument/bad address.
EINVAL. EFAULT is normally only used for when the user passes a bad
virtual memory address to the kernel. This isn't an address at all, it's
an index that points to an object for which this operation does not make
sense.
-Scott
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH] vfio: VFIO Driver core framework, (continued)
Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH] vfio: VFIO Driver core framework, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk, 2011/11/11
Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH] vfio: VFIO Driver core framework, Scott Wood, 2011/11/16
Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH] vfio: VFIO Driver core framework, Alex Williamson, 2011/11/17
Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH] vfio: VFIO Driver core framework, Scott Wood, 2011/11/11
Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH] vfio: VFIO Driver core framework, David Gibson, 2011/11/15