Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2002 12:41:28 +1000 (EST) From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> To: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> Cc: ken@kdm.org, <johan@FreeBSD.ORG>, <nsayer@quack.kfu.com>, <freebsd-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.ORG>, <freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG>, <freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.ORG>, <sos@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: kern/15608: acd0 / cd0 give inconsistent errors on empty tray open() Message-ID: <20020823122010.S6402-100000@gamplex.bde.org> In-Reply-To: <20020822.152329.129782316.imp@bsdimp.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 22 Aug 2002, M. Warner Losh wrote: > In message: <20020822150931.A10866@panzer.kdm.org> > "Kenneth D. Merry" <ken@kdm.org> writes: > : So is there any opinion on -standards as to what sort of error we should > : return on open if there is no media in a drive? > > EIO means "The device is there, but the driver had problems > interacting with it" while ENXIO means "the device isn't there at > all." As such, EIO is the more correct error to return in this case. No, EIO means that an input/output arror occurred. open.2 only documents EIO for creating files. Otherwise open() normally doesn't do any i/o. So ENXIO is the more correct error. I think the bug is that the open doesn't succeed. The device is reported as being there at boot time, and there is enough of it there to tell which parts of it aren't there, so why not open() it so that you do things like ioctl() on it to close its door and make it there? > I don't know if the standards speak to this specific issue (no or bad > media in a device with removable media). POSIX doesn't say anything much different from open.2 about this. Bruce To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-standards" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020823122010.S6402-100000>