Safe error numbers for User-defined return values

From: Andy Jeffries (lkml@andyjeffries.co.uk)
Date: Tue Nov 06 2001 - 06:22:16 EST

Next message: Matt Bernstein: "Re: Limited RAM - how to save it?"
Previous message: Jonas Diemer: "2.4.14 breaks block/loop.c (loopback device)"
Next in thread: Alan Cox: "Re: Safe error numbers for User-defined return values"
Reply: Alan Cox: "Re: Safe error numbers for User-defined return values"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Hi,

I want to define custom return values for my ioctl calls in my Kernel module. What is the recommended start value for user defined constants? I notice asm/errno.h only goes up to 124 (in 2.4.12), so should I start at 125 or should I start at 200 to be safe?

I probably only need 30 or so different codes.

Thanks,

-- 
Andy Jeffries                   | Scramdisk Linux Project
http://www.scramdisklinux.org   | Lead developer
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: Matt Bernstein: "Re: Limited RAM - how to save it?"
Previous message: Jonas Diemer: "2.4.14 breaks block/loop.c (loopback device)"
Next in thread: Alan Cox: "Re: Safe error numbers for User-defined return values"
Reply: Alan Cox: "Re: Safe error numbers for User-defined return values"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Nov 07 2001 - 21:00:29 EST