On 16/03/22 6:02 pm, Christian König wrote:
> Am 16.03.22 um 12:31 schrieb Matthew Auld:
>> On 16/03/2022 06:34, Arunpravin Paneer Selvam wrote:
>>> handle a situation in the condition order-- == min_order,
>>> when order = 0 and min_order = 0, leading to order = -1,
>>> it now won't exit the lo
On 16/03/22 5:01 pm, Matthew Auld wrote:
> On 16/03/2022 06:34, Arunpravin Paneer Selvam wrote:
>> handle a situation in the condition order-- == min_order,
>> when order = 0 and min_order = 0, leading to order = -1,
>> it now won't exit the loop. To avoid this problem,
>> added a order check in
Am 16.03.22 um 12:31 schrieb Matthew Auld:
On 16/03/2022 06:34, Arunpravin Paneer Selvam wrote:
handle a situation in the condition order-- == min_order,
when order = 0 and min_order = 0, leading to order = -1,
it now won't exit the loop. To avoid this problem,
added a order check in the same co
On 16/03/2022 06:34, Arunpravin Paneer Selvam wrote:
handle a situation in the condition order-- == min_order,
when order = 0 and min_order = 0, leading to order = -1,
it now won't exit the loop. To avoid this problem,
added a order check in the same condition, (i.e)
when order is 0, we return -E
Am 16.03.22 um 07:34 schrieb Arunpravin Paneer Selvam:
handle a situation in the condition order-- == min_order,
when order = 0 and min_order = 0, leading to order = -1,
it now won't exit the loop. To avoid this problem,
added a order check in the same condition, (i.e)
when order is 0, we return
handle a situation in the condition order-- == min_order,
when order = 0 and min_order = 0, leading to order = -1,
it now won't exit the loop. To avoid this problem,
added a order check in the same condition, (i.e)
when order is 0, we return -ENOSPC
v2: use full name in email program and in Signed
