[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <537F53BE.8030105@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 23 May 2014 19:27:18 +0530
From: Anshuman Khandual <khandual@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Pedro Alves <palves@...hat.com>
CC: mikey@...ling.org, avagin@...nvz.org, oleg@...hat.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, michael@...erman.id.au,
linuxppc-dev@...abs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 2/3] powerpc, ptrace: Enable support for transactional
memory register sets
On 05/22/2014 10:38 AM, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
> I agree.
>
>> >
>> > Maybe we should leave this for another day, and have tm_spr_active
>> > return 0 instead of -ENODEV when the machine doesn't have the hardware,
>> > or not install that hook at all. Seems like the effect will be the same,
>> > as the note isn't output if ->get fails.
> Agree. Active hooks which return 0 in case of -ENODEV sounds good to me and shall
> incorporate this in the next version.
>
But from "user_regset_active_fn" definition point of view -ENODEV is the right thing
to do even if we dont use it specifically compared to the return value of 0.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists