Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To:     "Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com>,
        "kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
Cc:     "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "peterz@infradead.org" <peterz@infradead.org>,
        "hjl.tools@gmail.com" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>,
        "linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        "dave.hansen@linux.intel.com" <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
        "aryabinin@virtuozzo.com" <aryabinin@virtuozzo.com>,
        "dvyukov@google.com" <dvyukov@google.com>,
        "x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
        "ak@linux.intel.com" <ak@linux.intel.com>,
        "Lutomirski, Andy" <luto@kernel.org>,
        "glider@google.com" <glider@google.com>
Subject: Re: [RFCv2 03/10] x86: Introduce userspace API to handle per-thread
 features
In-Reply-To: <543eb3ff98f624c6cfa1d450ac3e9ae8934c7c38.camel@intel.com>
References: <20220511022751.65540-1-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
 <20220511022751.65540-5-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
 <CAG_fn=V8k3hiviv3htV6wWZ6fUBri=MORfXGJ+Kz7GdRDZvesA@mail.gmail.com>
 <da0f438bb459050e5a586a17382e961259449761.camel@intel.com>
 <20220513230958.dbxp6m3y3lnq74qb@black.fi.intel.com>
 <543eb3ff98f624c6cfa1d450ac3e9ae8934c7c38.camel@intel.com>
Date:   Sat, 14 May 2022 10:37:25 +0200
Message-ID: <87k0aose62.ffs@tglx>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, May 13 2022 at 23:50, Edgecombe, Rick P wrote:
> On Sat, 2022-05-14 at 02:09 +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
>> On Fri, May 13, 2022 at 05:34:12PM +0000, Edgecombe, Rick P wrote:
>> > On Fri, 2022-05-13 at 16:09 +0200, Alexander Potapenko wrote:
>> > > > +
>> > > > +       /* Handle ARCH_THREAD_FEATURE_ENABLE */
>> > > > +
>> > > > +       task->thread.features |= features;
>> > > > +out:
>> > > > +       return task->thread.features;
>> > > 
>> > > Isn't arch_prctl() supposed to return 0 on success?
>> > 
>> > Hmm, good point. Maybe we'll need a struct to pass info in and out.
>> 
>> But values >0 are unused. I don't see why can't we use them.
>
> Hmm, I don't know what it would break since it is a new "code"
> argument. But the man page says:
> "On success, arch_prctl() returns 0; on error, -1 is returned, and
> errno is set to indicate the error."
>
> So just change the man pages?
> "On success, arch_prctl() returns positive values; on error, -1 is
> returned, and errno is set to indicate the error."

Why?

        prctl(GET, &out)

is the pattern used all over the place.

Thanks,

        tglx