On 26 Aug 2019, at 9:34, Björn Töpel wrote: > On 2019-08-26 17:24, Ilya Maximets wrote: >> This changes the error code a bit. >> Previously: >> umem exists + xs unbound --> EINVAL >> no umem + xs unbound --> EBADF >> xs bound to different dev/q --> EINVAL >> >> With this change: >> umem exists + xs unbound --> EBADF >> no umem + xs unbound --> EBADF >> xs bound to different dev/q --> EINVAL >> >> Just a note. Not sure if this is important. >> > > Note that this is for *shared* umem, so it's very seldom used. Still, > you're right, that strictly this is an uapi break, but I'd vote for the > change still. I find it hard to see that anyone relies on EINVAL/EBADF > for shared umem bind. > > Opinions? :-) I'd agree - if it isn't documented somewhere, it's not an API break. :) -- Jonathan
