On 26 Aug 2019, at 9:34, Björn Töpel wrote:
> On 2019-08-26 17:24, Ilya Maximets wrote:
>> This changes the error code a bit.
>> Previously:
>> umem exists + xs unbound --> EINVAL
>> no umem + xs unbound --> EBADF
>> xs bound to different dev/q --> EINVAL
>>
>> With this change:
>> umem exists + xs unbound --> EBADF
>> no umem + xs unbound --> EBADF
>> xs bound to different dev/q --> EINVAL
>>
>> Just a note. Not sure if this is important.
>>
>
> Note that this is for *shared* umem, so it's very seldom used. Still,
> you're right, that strictly this is an uapi break, but I'd vote for the
> change still. I find it hard to see that anyone relies on EINVAL/EBADF
> for shared umem bind.
>
> Opinions? :-)
I'd agree - if it isn't documented somewhere, it's not an API break. :)
--
Jonathan
