| To: | Scott Emery <emery@xxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [pcp] PM_ERR_APPVERSION vs other errors |
| From: | Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Wed, 1 Sep 2010 16:07:09 +1000 (EST) |
| Cc: | pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <201009010359.o813xDHm539522@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
----- "Scott Emery" <emery@xxxxxxx> wrote: > I'm nearly done with the initial list of comments for the Lustre > PMDA. > ... > unexpected.... is it still appropriate to return PM_ERR_APPVERSION, > or should I return something else? > > PM_ERR_GENERIC is probably a trifle unfriendly, I guess PM_ERR_VALUE > would be the way to go? If you get an unexpected version# in that file, I'd go with APPVERSION, but if the format is unrecognisable, PM_ERR_VALUE sounds right to me. cheers. -- Nathan |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Next by Date: | Re: [pcp] suitability of PCP for event tracing, Mark Goodwin |
|---|---|
| Next by Thread: | Re: [pcp] suitability of PCP for event tracing, Mark Goodwin |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |