Francois, On Wed, Nov 01, 2017 at 11:55:24AM +0100, Francois Romieu wrote: > Kirill Smelkov <kirr@xxxxxxxxxx> : > [...] > > I was keeping you in To and Cc all the time but got no reply at all since my > > first posting from ~ 1 month ago. > > I thought it was longer than that. Sorry for the frustrating excess delay. > > As Eric already said there is no problem and I am perfectly fine with > the current attribution of this code. Thanks for feedback. > Use of errno.h::ELNRNG is really unusual but it's a different topic. I wanted the error returned due to internal inconsistency to be different from the error returned when there is error in provided parameters from ethtool. Your original patch was returning EINVAL for both cases which made it hard to understand what is going on when the kernel was refusing to accept something from user. That's why I used ELNRNG (link number out of range) for situation when lookup of timings vector by current link speed failed. A bit unusual, yes, but this was the closest to the situation after studying `errno -l` output. Hope this clarifies a bit. Please feel free to suggest a change here, Kirill -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
