Re: [PATCH v3] drm: Differentiate the lack of an interface from invalid parameter

2018-09-14 Thread Chris Wilson
Quoting Chris Wilson (2018-09-13 20:20:50) > If the ioctl is not supported on a particular piece of HW/driver > combination, report ENOTSUP (aka EOPNOTSUPP) so that it can be easily > distinguished from both the lack of the ioctl and from a regular invalid > parameter. > > v2: Across all the kms i

[PATCH v3] drm: Differentiate the lack of an interface from invalid parameter

2018-09-13 Thread Chris Wilson
If the ioctl is not supported on a particular piece of HW/driver combination, report ENOTSUP (aka EOPNOTSUPP) so that it can be easily distinguished from both the lack of the ioctl and from a regular invalid parameter. v2: Across all the kms ioctls we had a mixture of reporting EINVAL, ENODEV and

Re: [PATCH v3] drm: Differentiate the lack of an interface from invalid parameter

2018-09-13 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 10:29:42AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > If the ioctl is not supported on a particular piece of HW/driver > combination, report ENOTSUPP so that it can be easily distinguished from > both the lack of the ioctl and from a regular invalid parameter. > > v2: Across all the kms

[PATCH v3] drm: Differentiate the lack of an interface from invalid parameter

2018-09-12 Thread Chris Wilson
If the ioctl is not supported on a particular piece of HW/driver combination, report ENOTSUPP so that it can be easily distinguished from both the lack of the ioctl and from a regular invalid parameter. v2: Across all the kms ioctls we had a mixture of reporting EINVAL, ENODEV and a few ENOTSUPP (