On Fri, 07 Oct 2011 16:12:45 MDT, Grant Likely said: > On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 12:43 AM, Greg KH <greg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 07, 2011 at 10:33:06AM +0500, G, Manjunath Kondaiah wrote: > >> +#define EPROBE_DEFER 517 /* restart probe again after some time */ > > > > Can we really do this? > According to Arnd, yes this is okay. > > Isn't this some user/kernel api here? > > What's wrong with just "overloading" on top of an existing error code? > > Surely one of the other 516 types could be used here, right? > overloading makes it really hard to find the users at a later date. Would proposing '#define EPROBE_DEFER EAGAIN' be acceptable to everybody? That would allow overloading EAGAIN, but still make it easy to tell the usages apart if we need to separate them later...
Attachment:
pgpgZBCGc9dAt.pgp
Description: PGP signature
