Hey Zach, On 11/1/22 01:38, Zach O'Keefe wrote:
I don't understand this last paragraph (since "Also note ..."). Could you please reword it a little bit?Sure - I can see that it's hard to parse. Further up I note that, "If collapse of a given huge page-aligned/sized region fails, the operation may continue to attempt collapsing the remainder of the specified memory." Then perhaps it's enough to just state, "In the event multiple hugepage-aligned/sized areas fail to collapse, only the most recently-failed code will be set in errno"
I like this.
The idea here being: errno only communicates the reason for 1/N failures that might have occured. However -- on second thought -- perhaps this isn't particularly useful, as it's already implied. So, my new suggestion would be that we should drop it. What do you think?
errno usually behaves like that if you call consecutive calls, but it's not so obvious how a single call will behave: it could report the last one as in this case, or the first one since it's the one that made it break. I'd keep it.
[...]
Diff for changing a few line breaks (and removing the spurious file):Thank you so much for this! :)
:) Cheers, Alex -- <http://www.alejandro-colomar.es/>
Attachment:
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
