On 4/19/21 8:19 PM, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 02:34:41PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 01:33:22PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
>>> On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 03:55:31PM +0800, He Zhe wrote:
The general version of is_syscall_success does not handle 32
On 4/16/21 8:33 PM, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 03:55:31PM +0800, He Zhe wrote:
>> The general version of is_syscall_success does not handle 32-bit
>> compatible case, which would cause 32-bit negative return code to be
>> recoganized as a positive number later and seen as a
On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 02:34:41PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 01:33:22PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 03:55:31PM +0800, He Zhe wrote:
> > > The general version of is_syscall_success does not handle 32-bit
> > > compatible case, which would caus
From: Mark Rutland
> Sent: 16 April 2021 14:35
..
> @@ -51,13 +48,7 @@ static inline void syscall_set_return_value(struct
> task_struct *task,
> struct pt_regs *regs,
> int error, long val)
> {
> - if (error)
On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 01:33:22PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 03:55:31PM +0800, He Zhe wrote:
> > The general version of is_syscall_success does not handle 32-bit
> > compatible case, which would cause 32-bit negative return code to be
> > recoganized as a positive numb
On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 03:55:31PM +0800, He Zhe wrote:
> The general version of is_syscall_success does not handle 32-bit
> compatible case, which would cause 32-bit negative return code to be
> recoganized as a positive number later and seen as a "success".
>
> Since is_compat_thread is defined
6 matches
Mail list logo