Re: [PATCH v10 0/7] User readable error codes on atomic_ioctl failure

["Murthy, Arun R" <arun.r.murthy@intel.com>]

On 24-02-2026 14:58, Jani Nikula wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Feb 2026, Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>> Although I kinda doubt its actual usefulness to drive useful
>> fallback logic because often the restrictions might be a combination
>> of many things, and the kernel can only realistically report one of
>> those things.
> Yeah, this is my main concern as well. The drivers will have to bail out
> on the first issue they hit, whatever it is. The drivers may choose to
> do the checks in different orders, resulting in different failure modes
> for different drivers. And finally, accidentally making the order of the
> checks part of the ABI contract is a scary prospect. Imagine user space
> depending on certain checks happening first in order for the fallback
> logic to work properly. Is it a kernel regression to change the order of
> the checks then?
We are just reporting the 1st error that we see in the KMD and return 
from there.

Thanks and Regards,
Arun R Murthy
-------------------
> BR,
> Jani.
>
>