On Sat, 2022-05-14 at 02:09 +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: > On Fri, May 13, 2022 at 05:34:12PM +0000, Edgecombe, Rick P wrote: > > On Fri, 2022-05-13 at 16:09 +0200, Alexander Potapenko wrote: > > > > + > > > > + /* Handle ARCH_THREAD_FEATURE_ENABLE */ > > > > + > > > > + task->thread.features |= features; > > > > +out: > > > > + return task->thread.features; > > > > > > Isn't arch_prctl() supposed to return 0 on success? > > > > Hmm, good point. Maybe we'll need a struct to pass info in and out. > > But values >0 are unused. I don't see why can't we use them. Hmm, I don't know what it would break since it is a new "code" argument. But the man page says: "On success, arch_prctl() returns 0; on error, -1 is returned, and errno is set to indicate the error." So just change the man pages? "On success, arch_prctl() returns positive values; on error, -1 is returned, and errno is set to indicate the error."
