Re: [patch] mm: madvise correct return code

[AmÃrico Wang]

On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 1:21 PM, Nick Piggin <npiggin@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> This is a pretty obscure case, but it doesn't hurt to follow standards
> if they're there. I can't imagine any real program relying on a 0 range
> madvise call with invalid behaviour *not* failing... We have this in
> SLES11 FWIW, and no problems reported.
> --


But it was not consistent with the man page... we should fix it.

>
> mm: madvise correct return code
>
> The posix_madvise() function succeeds (and does nothing) when called with
> parameters (NULL, 0, -1); according to LSB tests, it should fail with EINVAL
> because -1 is not a valid flag.
>
> When called with a valid address and size, it correctly fails.
>
> So perform an initial check for valid flags first.
>
> Reported-by: Jiri Dluhos <jdluhos@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Nick Piggin <npiggin@xxxxxxx>

Reviewed-and-Tested-by: WANG Cong <xiyou.wangcong@xxxxxxxxx>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/