On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 03:47:26PM -0600, Eric DeVolder wrote:
> This contains the two corrections pointed out by Jan Beulich
> for the kexec STATUS call just introduced.
>
> Note: In kexec_status(), the use of test_bit() can also return
> EPERM, so the return value from test_bit() must be checked
This contains the two corrections pointed out by Jan Beulich
for the kexec STATUS call just introduced.
Note: In kexec_status(), the use of test_bit() can also return
EPERM, so the return value from test_bit() must be checked to
ensure that kexec_status() always returns 0, 1 or -1, per the
public
