On Fri, 2012-09-14 at 11:00 -0700, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > > Understood and there have been suggestions on how to definitely state > > what the kernel side did not like. I like Peter's last suggestion -- > > something along the lines of clearing attr on a failure except the > > offending setting. > > I think ws need to use a new bit
Quite so, for all the reasons you list. But you like the general idea? I wasn't sure I did, but it was the only thing I could come up with that would sort of do what we need it to. The fact that you destroy the user input is awkward, I don't think there's another syscall that behaves in this fashion. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
