On Thu, 2008-01-10 at 16:01 +0100, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> On Wed, 9 Jan 2008, Alan Cox wrote:
> 
> > > > >       default:
> > > > >               printk("%s: Unimplemented ioctl 0x%x\n", tape->name, 
> > > > > cmd);
> > > > > +             unlock_kernel();
> > > > >               return -EINVAL;
> > > > Surely a bug ... shouldn't this return -ENOTTY?
> > Agreed - ENOTTY. 
> 
> Just out of curiosity, where does POSIX happen to specify ENOTTY as the 
> correct one for unimplemented ioctl?
> 

The printk is also wrong, It should have been, Invalid ioctl for the
device

--
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/

Reply via email to