linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1] mm/madvise: pass return code of memory

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 26 Jan 2016 15:27:58 -0800
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@...jp.nec.com>
Cc:	Chen Gong <gong.chen@...ux.intel.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Naoya Horiguchi <nao.horiguchi@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] mm/madvise: pass return code of memory_failure() to
 userspace

On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 17:27:57 +0900 Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@...jp.nec.com> wrote:

> Currently the return value of memory_failure() is not passed to userspace, which
> is inconvenient for test programs that want to know the result of error handling.
> So let's return it to the caller as we already do in MADV_SOFT_OFFLINE case.

I updated this to mention that it's for madvise(MADV_HWPOISON):

: Currently the return value of memory_failure() is not passed to userspace
: when madvise(MADV_HWPOISON) is used.  This is inconvenient for test
: programs that want to know the result of error handling.  So let's return
: it to the caller as we already do in the MADV_SOFT_OFFLINE case.

btw, MADV_SOFT_OFFLINE and MADV_HWPOISON are not documented in that
comment block over sys_madvise().  Fixy please?  You might want to
check that no other MADV_foo values have been omitted.