On Thu, Sep 21 2023 at 12:45, peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > The current semantics for futex_wake() are a bit loose, specifically > asking for 0 futexes to be woken actually gets you 1. > > Adding a !nr check to sys_futex_wake() makes that it would return 0 > for unaligned futex words, because that check comes in the shared > futex_wake() function. Adding the !nr check there, would affect the > legacy sys_futex() semantics. > > Hence frob a flag :-( > > Suggested-by: André Almeida <andrealmeid@xxxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Reviewed-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
