Add cc's. On 02/06, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > And in fact I think that this is not set_child_tid/etc-specific. Perhaps > I am totally confused, but I think that put_user() simply should not fail > this way. Say, why a syscall should return -EFAULT if memory allocation > "silently" fails? Confused. Seriously. I must have missed something, but I can't understand 519e52473eb "mm: memcg: enable memcg OOM killer only for user faults". The changelog says: System calls and kernel faults (uaccess, gup) can handle an out of memory situation gracefully and just return -ENOMEM. How can a system call know it should return -ENOMEM if put_user() can only return -EFAULT ? Oleg. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-api" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html