Re: BUG? atleast >=2.6.19-rc5, x86 chroot on x86_64

[Alan]

On Wed, 13 Dec 2006 02:50:01 -0500
Chuck Ebbert <76306.1226@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> In-Reply-To: <1165984783.23819.7.camel@localhost>
> 
> On Wed, 13 Dec 2006 05:39:43 +0100, Kasper Sandberg wrote:
> 
> > do you think it may be a bug in the kernel? the stuff with wine that
> > gets thrown in the kernel messages?
> 
> Let's just say the behavior has changed.  It now returns
> -EINVAL instead of -ENOTTY when the msdos IOCTLs fail.

For an unknown ioctl the correct return is -ENOTTY. For an invalid ioctl
(known but wrong parameters) it may be -EINVAL.

> Anyway, here is a much simpler patch that restores the previous
> behavior (but leaves the message.)  However if you aren't having
> any problems now other than the messages maybe there's no real
> problem after all?

As far as I can see from a quick review the code should return -ENOTTY
in this situation not -EINVAL, for all unhandled ioctls.

Alan
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/