Add cc's.
On 02/06, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> And in fact I think that this is not set_child_tid/etc-specific. Perhaps
> I am totally confused, but I think that put_user() simply should not fail
> this way. Say, why a syscall should return -EFAULT if memory allocation
> "silently" fails? Confused.
Seriously. I must have missed something, but I can't understand 519e52473eb
"mm: memcg: enable memcg OOM killer only for user faults".
The changelog says:
System calls and kernel faults (uaccess, gup) can handle an out of
memory situation gracefully and just return -ENOMEM.
How can a system call know it should return -ENOMEM if put_user() can only
return -EFAULT ?
Oleg.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
