On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 11:23:51AM +0900, Tsutomu Itoh wrote: > Hi, David, > > On 2016/01/22 23:00, David Sterba wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 09:13:25AM +0900, Tsutomu Itoh wrote: > >> ENOTSUPP should not be returned to the user program. > >> (cf. include/linux/errno.h) > >> Therefore, EOPNOTSUPP is used instead of ENOTSUPP. > > > > I'm not sure that EOPNOTSUPP is the right error code here. I'd rather > > make it EINVAL, the bug we're talking about is a new type of inode > > outside of the S_IFMT bits. "not supported" would mean we don't support > > it but we could in theory. > > Thanks for review. > > In the meaning that btrfs-send is not supporting a new type of inode now, > EOPNOTSUPP is acceptable, I think. It is, there's a warning message printed anyway, the actual error code does not matter much. Reviewed-by: David Sterba <dsterba@xxxxxxxx> -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
