Please, fellas, take a look on my post! Thanks in advance.
Anton Arapov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Hi! > > SysV code returns EIDRM for collision of IDs. I sure it should return > EINVAL. > > Steps to reproduce: (this for shared memory code, for msg/sem it is the > same) > 1. Create then drop 2 shmem segments, then create a third. > 2. Try to shmctl(IPC_STAT) the two now-invalid shm IDs. > 3. Note error codes returned. > > One call gives EINVAL, one gives EIDRM due to collision with the third > shmem segment. > Should both give EINVAL, this is what I've got on every other Unix I've > tried it on. > > IPC code is good, EIDRM is justification of EINVAL. But neither SVr4 nor > SVID documents EIDRM. > Single Unix Specification mentions EINVAL but not EIDRM as a possible > failure for shmctl(), so the current kernel behavior is not merely > self-inconsistent but a flat violation of the spec. > > Can somebody explain why do we have EIDRM? > > Anton. > SUS: http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/007908799/xsh/shmctl.html - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
