On Wed, Jan 12, 2022 at 06:00:51PM -0800, Luck, Tony wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 12, 2022 at 09:11:45PM +0900, Naoya Horiguchi wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 07, 2022 at 11:44:50AM -0800, Tony Luck wrote:
> > > From: Youquan Song <youquan.song@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> > diff --git a/mm/memory-failure.c b/mm/memory-failure.c
> > index 14ae5c18e776..4c9bd1d37301 100644
> > --- a/mm/memory-failure.c
> > +++ b/mm/memory-failure.c
> > @@ -707,8 +707,10 @@ static int kill_accessing_process(struct task_struct *p, unsigned long pfn,
> > (void *)&priv);
> > if (ret == 1 && priv.tk.addr)
> > kill_proc(&priv.tk, pfn, flags);
> > + else
> > + ret = 0;
> > mmap_read_unlock(p->mm);
> > - return ret ? -EFAULT : -EHWPOISON;
> > + return ret > 0 ? -EHWPOISON : -EFAULT;
> > }
> >
> > static const char *action_name[] = {
>
> Yes. This fixes the problem (and your explanation helped
> me understand this code better).
>
Thank you for confirming. I just sent v2.
> Fell free to take any words you need from the original patch
> comment and switch to:
>
> Reported-by: Youquan Song <youquan.song@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> Thanks for looking (and fixing!)
Your welcome :)
- Naoya
