On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 02:59:11PM +0100, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> [CC += linux-api, linux-man]
>
> On 01/22/2016 09:27 AM, Naoya Horiguchi wrote:
> > Currently the return value of memory_failure() is not passed to userspace,
> > which
> > is inconvenient for test programs that want to know the
[CC += linux-api, linux-man]
On 01/22/2016 09:27 AM, Naoya Horiguchi wrote:
> Currently the return value of memory_failure() is not passed to userspace,
> which
> is inconvenient for test programs that want to know the result of error
> handling.
> So let's return it to the caller as we already
On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 02:59:11PM +0100, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> [CC += linux-api, linux-man]
>
> On 01/22/2016 09:27 AM, Naoya Horiguchi wrote:
> > Currently the return value of memory_failure() is not passed to userspace,
> > which
> > is inconvenient for test programs that want to know the
[CC += linux-api, linux-man]
On 01/22/2016 09:27 AM, Naoya Horiguchi wrote:
> Currently the return value of memory_failure() is not passed to userspace,
> which
> is inconvenient for test programs that want to know the result of error
> handling.
> So let's return it to the caller as we already
On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 03:27:58PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 17:27:57 +0900 Naoya Horiguchi
> wrote:
>
> > Currently the return value of memory_failure() is not passed to userspace,
> > which
> > is inconvenient for test programs that want to know the result of error
>
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 17:27:57 +0900 Naoya Horiguchi
wrote:
> Currently the return value of memory_failure() is not passed to userspace,
> which
> is inconvenient for test programs that want to know the result of error
> handling.
> So let's return it to the caller as we already do in
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 17:27:57 +0900 Naoya Horiguchi
wrote:
> Currently the return value of memory_failure() is not passed to userspace,
> which
> is inconvenient for test programs that want to know the result of error
> handling.
> So let's return it to the caller as
On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 03:27:58PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 17:27:57 +0900 Naoya Horiguchi
> wrote:
>
> > Currently the return value of memory_failure() is not passed to userspace,
> > which
> > is inconvenient for test programs that want to
Currently the return value of memory_failure() is not passed to userspace, which
is inconvenient for test programs that want to know the result of error
handling.
So let's return it to the caller as we already do in MADV_SOFT_OFFLINE case.
Signed-off-by: Naoya Horiguchi
---
mm/madvise.c | 5
Currently the return value of memory_failure() is not passed to userspace, which
is inconvenient for test programs that want to know the result of error
handling.
So let's return it to the caller as we already do in MADV_SOFT_OFFLINE case.
Signed-off-by: Naoya Horiguchi
10 matches
Mail list logo