From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>
To: Alejandro Colomar <alx@kernel.org>
Cc: Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@google.com>,
Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>,
linux-man@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/10] ioctl_userfaultfd.2: correct and update UFFDIO_API ioctl error codes
Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2023 11:49:11 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20231009084911.GK3303@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5ddepg57wqnidtvsio2pse44dot6pvr3rcmhwld6ml3sflwcz3@ijd3h4teqblr>
On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 01:52:34AM +0200, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
> Hi Axel,
>
> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 12:02:03PM -0700, Axel Rasmussen wrote:
> > First, it is not correct that repeated UFFDIO_API calls result in
> > EINVAL. This is true *if both calls enable features*, but in the case
> > where we're doing a two-step feature detection handshake, the kernel
> > explicitly expects 2 calls (one with no features set). So, correct this
> > description.
> >
> > Then, some new error cases have been added to the kernel recently, and
> > the man page wasn't updated to note these. So, add in descriptions of
> > these new error cases.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@google.com>
> > ---
> > man2/ioctl_userfaultfd.2 | 24 +++++++++++++++++++-----
> > 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/man2/ioctl_userfaultfd.2 b/man2/ioctl_userfaultfd.2
> > index 53b1f473f..1aa9654be 100644
> > --- a/man2/ioctl_userfaultfd.2
> > +++ b/man2/ioctl_userfaultfd.2
> > @@ -280,17 +280,31 @@ refers to an address that is outside the calling process's
> > accessible address space.
> > .TP
> > .B EINVAL
> > -The userfaultfd has already been enabled by a previous
> > -.B UFFDIO_API
> > -operation.
> > -.TP
> > -.B EINVAL
> > The API version requested in the
> > .I api
> > field is not supported by this kernel, or the
> > .I features
> > field passed to the kernel includes feature bits that are not supported
> > by the current kernel version.
> > +.TP
> > +.B EPERM
>
> This EPERM should probably be at the end. Unless you have a good reason
> to break alphabetic order.
I agree with Alex here, other than that feel free to add
Reviewed-by: Mike Rapoport (IBM) <rppt@kernel.org>
> Thanks,
> Alex
>
> > +The
> > +.B UFFD_FEATURE_EVENT_FORK
> > +feature was enabled,
> > +but the calling process doesn't have the
> > +.B CAP_SYS_PTRACE
> > +capability.
> > +.TP
> > +.B EINVAL
> > +A previous
> > +.B UFFDIO_API
> > +call already enabled one or more features for this userfaultfd.
> > +Calling
> > +.B UFFDIO_API
> > +twice,
> > +the first time with no features set,
> > +is explicitly allowed
> > +as per the two-step feature detection handshake.
> > .\" FIXME In the above error case, the returned 'uffdio_api' structure is
> > .\" zeroed out. Why is this done? This should be explained in the manual page.
> > .\"
> > --
> > 2.42.0.459.ge4e396fd5e-goog
> >
--
Sincerely yours,
Mike.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-10-09 8:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-09-19 19:01 [PATCH 00/10] userfaultfd man page updates Axel Rasmussen
2023-09-19 19:01 ` [PATCH 01/10] userfaultfd.2: briefly mention two-step feature handshake process Axel Rasmussen
2023-09-25 23:26 ` Alejandro Colomar
2023-10-09 8:38 ` Mike Rapoport
2023-09-19 19:01 ` [PATCH 02/10] userfaultfd.2: reword to account for new fault resolution ioctls Axel Rasmussen
2023-09-25 23:29 ` Alejandro Colomar
2023-10-09 8:39 ` Mike Rapoport
2023-09-19 19:01 ` [PATCH 03/10] userfaultfd.2: comment on feature detection in the example program Axel Rasmussen
2023-09-25 23:32 ` Alejandro Colomar
2023-10-09 8:40 ` Mike Rapoport
2023-09-19 19:02 ` [PATCH 04/10] ioctl_userfaultfd.2: fix a few trivial mistakes Axel Rasmussen
2023-09-25 23:37 ` Alejandro Colomar
2023-09-19 19:02 ` [PATCH 05/10] ioctl_userfaultfd.2: describe two-step feature handshake Axel Rasmussen
2023-09-25 23:44 ` Alejandro Colomar
2023-10-09 8:42 ` Mike Rapoport
2023-10-09 10:58 ` Alejandro Colomar
2023-09-19 19:02 ` [PATCH 06/10] ioctl_userfaultfd.2: describe missing UFFDIO_API feature flags Axel Rasmussen
2023-09-25 23:50 ` Alejandro Colomar
2023-10-09 8:45 ` Mike Rapoport
2023-10-09 10:49 ` Alejandro Colomar
2023-09-19 19:02 ` [PATCH 07/10] ioctl_userfaultfd.2: correct and update UFFDIO_API ioctl error codes Axel Rasmussen
2023-09-25 23:52 ` Alejandro Colomar
2023-10-09 8:49 ` Mike Rapoport [this message]
2023-10-09 11:01 ` Alejandro Colomar
2023-09-19 19:02 ` [PATCH 08/10] ioctl_userfaultfd.2: clarify the state of the uffdio_api structure on error Axel Rasmussen
2023-09-25 23:56 ` Alejandro Colomar
2023-09-26 17:58 ` Axel Rasmussen
2023-10-09 9:03 ` Mike Rapoport
2023-09-19 19:02 ` [PATCH 09/10] ioctl_userfaultfd.2: fix / update UFFDIO_REGISTER error code list Axel Rasmussen
2023-09-19 19:02 ` [PATCH 10/10] ioctl_userfaultfd.2: document new UFFDIO_POISON ioctl Axel Rasmussen
2023-10-09 9:09 ` Mike Rapoport
2023-10-10 17:13 ` Axel Rasmussen
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20231009084911.GK3303@kernel.org \
--to=rppt@kernel.org \
--cc=alx@kernel.org \
--cc=axelrasmussen@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-man@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=peterx@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).