Rene Herman wrote:

> Attached is a version that simply jumps to a return -EINVAL, which
> would also be the easiest way to fixup the others, at least for
> -stable. If you disagree though, in the next message I'll sent a
> version that does register the error, but for now just turns them
> into -EINVAL before returning.

As promised. As said, I prefer the previous one. With this one, it would 
only be a matter of deleting the "error = -EINVAL;" lines again to have 
it propagate the error up after a resolution of that -ENODEV | -ENXIO 
thing, but since the value isn't used anyway...

Rene.