Re: [PATCH v3 5/7] CIFS: Translate SHARING_VIOLATION to -ETXTBSYerror code for SMB2

[Pavel Shilovsky]

2013/3/11 Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx>:
> On Thu, 28 Feb 2013 19:25:31 +0400
> Pavel Shilovsky <piastry@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> to make it match CIFS and VFS variants.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Pavel Shilovsky <piastry@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>>  fs/cifs/smb2maperror.c | 2 +-
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/cifs/smb2maperror.c b/fs/cifs/smb2maperror.c
>> index 494c912..11e589e 100644
>> --- a/fs/cifs/smb2maperror.c
>> +++ b/fs/cifs/smb2maperror.c
>> @@ -356,7 +356,7 @@ static const struct status_to_posix_error smb2_error_map_table[] = {
>>       {STATUS_PORT_CONNECTION_REFUSED, -ECONNREFUSED,
>>       "STATUS_PORT_CONNECTION_REFUSED"},
>>       {STATUS_INVALID_PORT_HANDLE, -EIO, "STATUS_INVALID_PORT_HANDLE"},
>> -     {STATUS_SHARING_VIOLATION, -EBUSY, "STATUS_SHARING_VIOLATION"},
>> +     {STATUS_SHARING_VIOLATION, -ETXTBSY, "STATUS_SHARING_VIOLATION"},
>>       {STATUS_QUOTA_EXCEEDED, -EDQUOT, "STATUS_QUOTA_EXCEEDED"},
>>       {STATUS_INVALID_PAGE_PROTECTION, -EIO,
>>       "STATUS_INVALID_PAGE_PROTECTION"},
>
> Actually, I think Sachin is converting the CIFS
> STATUS_SHARING_VIOLATION to translate to EBUSY, since that seems to
> better reflect the situation. I'd suggest dropping this patch, unless
> you have a specific need for this error return here.

Yes, I am ok to drop this patch - accoring to the previous discussion
in linux-cifs@ it is no suitable.

-- 
Best regards,
Pavel Shilovsky.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/