[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190211211917.kq2ahdkhoe36obhp@brauner.io>
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2019 22:19:19 +0100
From: Christian Brauner <christian@...uner.io>
To: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, mcgrof@...nel.org, longman@...hat.com,
linux@...inikbrodowski.net, keescook@...omium.org,
joe.lawrence@...hat.com, ebiederm@...ssion.com
Subject: Re: + sysctl-return-einval-if-val-violates-minmax.patch added to -mm
tree
On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 12:17:16AM +0300, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 01:06:32PM -0800, akpm@...ux-foundation.org wrote:
>
> > @@ -2848,8 +2848,10 @@ static int __do_proc_doulongvec_minmax(v
>
> > - if ((min && val < *min) || (max && val > *max))
> > - continue;
> > + if ((min && val < *min) || (max && val > *max)) {
> > + err = -EINVAL;
>
> I was asked to return ERANGE in kstrto*().
I think we discussed ERANGE vs EINVAL and decided EINVAL because there
was precedence for other sysctls already.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists