linux-kernel - Re: [v3 PATCH] mm: move_pages: return valid node id in status if the page is already on the target node

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]

Message-Id: <D0A99204-A60F-428E-B77A-63DBCD7103F4@lca.pw>
Date:   Thu, 5 Dec 2019 19:19:34 -0500
From:   Qian Cai <cai@....pw>
To:     John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>
Cc:     Yang Shi <yang.shi@...ux.alibaba.com>, fabecassis@...dia.com,
        mhocko@...e.com, cl@...ux.com, vbabka@...e.cz,
        mgorman@...hsingularity.net, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [v3 PATCH] mm: move_pages: return valid node id in status if the page is already on the target node



> On Dec 5, 2019, at 7:04 PM, John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com> wrote:
> 
> Felix's code is not random test code. It's code he wrote and he expected it to work.

Sure, but could he show a bit detail if the kernel will start to behavior as expected like what was written in the manpage to return ENOENT in this case, why is it not acceptable? i.e., why is it important to depend on the broken behavior?