On 6/22/20 2:52 PM, Souptick Joarder wrote: > > I read the code again. I think, this check is needed to handle a scenario when > lock_pages() return -ENOSPC. Better to keep this check. Let me post v2 of this > RFC for a clear view.
Actually, error handling seems to be somewhat broken here. If lock_pages() returns number of pinned pages then that's what we end up returning from privcmd_ioctl_dm_op(), all the way to user ioctl(). Which I don't think is right, we should return proper (negative) error. Do you mind fixing that we well? Then you should be able to avoid testing pages in a loop. -boris
