Hello Mike,
Thanks for promptly reviewing the patches.
Mike Rapoport rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com writes:
Hi,
On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 11:42:07PM -0300, Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote:
If the userfaultfd test is run on a kernel with CONFIG_USERFAULTFD=n, it will report that the system call is not available yet go ahead and continue anyway:
# ./userfaultfd anon 30 1 nr_pages: 480, nr_pages_per_cpu: 120 userfaultfd syscall not available in this kernel bounces: 0, mode:, register failure
This is because userfaultfd_open() returns 0 on success and 1 on error but all callers assume that it returns < 0 on error.
Since the convention of the test as a whole is the one used by userfault_open(), fix its callers instead. Now the test behaves correctly:
# ./userfaultfd anon 30 1 nr_pages: 480, nr_pages_per_cpu: 120 userfaultfd syscall not available in this kernel
Signed-off-by: Thiago Jung Bauermann bauerman@linux.ibm.com
It seems that this patch is superseded by the second patch in this series.
Yes, but since this is a simple bugfix while the other patch is a proposed improvement which can be debated, I think it's worthwhile to keep them separate.
-- Thiago Jung Bauermann IBM Linux Technology Center
-- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kselftest" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html