[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZSMn-H_BUmJMi9La@debian>
Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2023 00:06:48 +0200
From: Alejandro Colomar <alx@...nel.org>
To: Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@...gle.com>
Cc: Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>, linux-man@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] ioctl_userfaultfd.2: fix / update UFFDIO_REGISTER
error code list
Hi Axel,
On Tue, Oct 03, 2023 at 12:45:46PM -0700, Axel Rasmussen wrote:
> The list of error codes in the man page was out of date with respect to
> the current state of the kernel. Some errors were partially /
> incorrectly described.
>
> Update the error code listing, so it matches the current state of the
> kernel, and correctly describes all the errors.
>
> Signed-off-by: Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@...gle.com>
> ---
> man2/ioctl_userfaultfd.2 | 37 +++++++++++++++++++++----------------
> 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/man2/ioctl_userfaultfd.2 b/man2/ioctl_userfaultfd.2
> index 2ee6a0532..95d69f773 100644
> --- a/man2/ioctl_userfaultfd.2
> +++ b/man2/ioctl_userfaultfd.2
> @@ -388,12 +388,6 @@ On error, \-1 is returned and
> .I errno
> is set to indicate the error.
> Possible errors include:
> -.\" FIXME Is the following error list correct?
> -.\"
> -.TP
> -.B EBUSY
> -A mapping in the specified range is registered with another
> -userfaultfd object.
> .TP
> .B EFAULT
> .I argp
> @@ -408,21 +402,32 @@ field; or the
> field was zero.
> .TP
> .B EINVAL
> -There is no mapping in the specified address range.
> -.TP
> -.B EINVAL
> +The specified address range was invalid.
> +More specifically,
> +no mapping exists in the given range,
> +or the mapping that exists there is invalid
> +(e.g. unsupported type of memory),
> +or the range values (
This produces some unwanted space. Please apply the following fix to
your patch.
diff --git a/man2/ioctl_userfaultfd.2 b/man2/ioctl_userfaultfd.2
index 6e954e98c..795014794 100644
--- a/man2/ioctl_userfaultfd.2
+++ b/man2/ioctl_userfaultfd.2
@@ -432,11 +432,11 @@ .SS UFFDIO_REGISTER
no mapping exists in the given range,
or the mapping that exists there is invalid
(e.g. unsupported type of memory),
-or the range values (
-.I range.start
+or the range values
+.IR ( range.start
or
-.I range.len
-) are not multiples of the relevant page size,
+.IR range.len )
+are not multiples of the relevant page size,
or
.I range.len
is zero.
> .I range.start
> or
> .I range.len
> -is not a multiple of the system page size; or,
> +) are not multiples of the relevant page size,
> +or
> .I range.len
> -is zero; or these fields are otherwise invalid.
> +is zero.
> .TP
> -.B EINVAL
> -There as an incompatible mapping in the specified address range.
> -.\" Mike Rapoport:
> -.\" ENOMEM if the process is exiting and the
> -.\" mm_struct has gone by the time userfault grabs it.
> +.B ENOMEM
> +The process is exiting,
> +and its address space has already been torn down
> +when userfaultfd attempts to reference it.
> +.TP
> +.B EPERM
> +The userfaultfd would allow writing to a file backing the mapping,
> +but the calling process lacks such write permissions.
> +.TP
> +.B EBUSY
> +A mapping in the specified range is registered with another
> +userfaultfd object.
Why would you move EBUSY to the end? Do you see any reasons to order it
that way?
Thanks,
Alex
> .SS UFFDIO_UNREGISTER
> (Since Linux 4.3.)
> Unregister a memory address range from userfaultfd.
> --
> 2.42.0.609.gbb76f46606-goog
>
--
<https://www.alejandro-colomar.es/>
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (834 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists