Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 5 Mar 2016 03:09:50 -0500 (EST) | From | Jan Stancek <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] mm/hugetlb: use EOPNOTSUPP in hugetlb sysctl handlers |
| |
----- Original Message ----- > From: "Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org> > To: "Jan Stancek" <jstancek@redhat.com> > Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com, "mike kravetz" > <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>, "hillf zj" <hillf.zj@alibaba-inc.com>, "kirill shutemov" > <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>, "dave hansen" <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>, "paul gortmaker" > <paul.gortmaker@windriver.com> > Sent: Friday, 4 March, 2016 10:38:07 PM > Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/hugetlb: use EOPNOTSUPP in hugetlb sysctl handlers > > On Thu, 3 Mar 2016 11:02:51 +0100 Jan Stancek <jstancek@redhat.com> wrote: > > > Replace ENOTSUPP with EOPNOTSUPP. If hugepages are not supported, > > this value is propagated to userspace. EOPNOTSUPP is part of uapi > > and is widely supported by libc libraries. > > hm, what is the actual user-visible effect of this change? Does it fix > some misbehaviour? >
It gives nicer message to user, rather than: # cat /proc/sys/vm/nr_hugepages cat: /proc/sys/vm/nr_hugepages: Unknown error 524
And also LTP's proc01 test was failing because this ret code (524) was unexpected: proc01 1 TFAIL : proc01.c:396: read failed: /proc/sys/vm/nr_hugepages: errno=???(524): Unknown error 524 proc01 2 TFAIL : proc01.c:396: read failed: /proc/sys/vm/nr_hugepages_mempolicy: errno=???(524): Unknown error 524 proc01 3 TFAIL : proc01.c:396: read failed: /proc/sys/vm/nr_overcommit_hugepages: errno=???(524): Unknown error 524
Regards, Jan
| |