On Tue, May 07, 2019 at 12:13:47PM +0100, Patrick Bellasi wrote: > On 17-Apr 15:26, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 3:42 AM Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > @@ -1056,6 +1100,13 @@ static void __init init_uclamp(void) > > > #else /* CONFIG_UCLAMP_TASK */ > > > static inline void uclamp_rq_inc(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p) { } > > > static inline void uclamp_rq_dec(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p) { } > > > +static inline int uclamp_validate(struct task_struct *p, > > > + const struct sched_attr *attr) > > > +{ > > > + return -ENODEV; > > > > ENOSYS might be more appropriate? > > Yep, agree, thanks! No, -ENOSYS (see the comment) is special in that it indicates the whole system call is unavailable; that is most certainly not the case!