linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 3/6] testing/pkeys: Add additional test for pkey

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 16 Jun 2022 13:24:26 -0700
From:   Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To:     Sohil Mehta <sohil.mehta@...el.com>, ira.weiny@...el.com,
        linux-api@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        "Aneesh Kumar K . V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.ibm.com>, x86@...nel.org,
        linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 3/6] testing/pkeys: Add additional test for
 pkey_alloc()

On 6/16/22 12:25, Sohil Mehta wrote:
> Should we have different return error codes when compile support is 
> disabled vs when runtime support is missing?

It doesn't *really* matter.  Programs have to be able to run on old
kernels which will return ENOSYS.  So, _when_ new kernels return ENOSYS
or ENOSPC is pretty immaterial.