Hi Axel, On Tue, Oct 03, 2023 at 12:45:46PM -0700, Axel Rasmussen wrote: > The list of error codes in the man page was out of date with respect to > the current state of the kernel. Some errors were partially / > incorrectly described. > > Update the error code listing, so it matches the current state of the > kernel, and correctly describes all the errors. > > Signed-off-by: Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > man2/ioctl_userfaultfd.2 | 37 +++++++++++++++++++++---------------- > 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/man2/ioctl_userfaultfd.2 b/man2/ioctl_userfaultfd.2 > index 2ee6a0532..95d69f773 100644 > --- a/man2/ioctl_userfaultfd.2 > +++ b/man2/ioctl_userfaultfd.2 > @@ -388,12 +388,6 @@ On error, \-1 is returned and > .I errno > is set to indicate the error. > Possible errors include: > -.\" FIXME Is the following error list correct? > -.\" > -.TP > -.B EBUSY > -A mapping in the specified range is registered with another > -userfaultfd object. > .TP > .B EFAULT > .I argp > @@ -408,21 +402,32 @@ field; or the > field was zero. > .TP > .B EINVAL > -There is no mapping in the specified address range. > -.TP > -.B EINVAL > +The specified address range was invalid. > +More specifically, > +no mapping exists in the given range, > +or the mapping that exists there is invalid > +(e.g. unsupported type of memory), > +or the range values ( This produces some unwanted space. Please apply the following fix to your patch. diff --git a/man2/ioctl_userfaultfd.2 b/man2/ioctl_userfaultfd.2 index 6e954e98c..795014794 100644 --- a/man2/ioctl_userfaultfd.2 +++ b/man2/ioctl_userfaultfd.2 @@ -432,11 +432,11 @@ .SS UFFDIO_REGISTER no mapping exists in the given range, or the mapping that exists there is invalid (e.g. unsupported type of memory), -or the range values ( -.I range.start +or the range values +.IR ( range.start or -.I range.len -) are not multiples of the relevant page size, +.IR range.len ) +are not multiples of the relevant page size, or .I range.len is zero. > .I range.start > or > .I range.len > -is not a multiple of the system page size; or, > +) are not multiples of the relevant page size, > +or > .I range.len > -is zero; or these fields are otherwise invalid. > +is zero. > .TP > -.B EINVAL > -There as an incompatible mapping in the specified address range. > -.\" Mike Rapoport: > -.\" ENOMEM if the process is exiting and the > -.\" mm_struct has gone by the time userfault grabs it. > +.B ENOMEM > +The process is exiting, > +and its address space has already been torn down > +when userfaultfd attempts to reference it. > +.TP > +.B EPERM > +The userfaultfd would allow writing to a file backing the mapping, > +but the calling process lacks such write permissions. > +.TP > +.B EBUSY > +A mapping in the specified range is registered with another > +userfaultfd object. Why would you move EBUSY to the end? Do you see any reasons to order it that way? Thanks, Alex > .SS UFFDIO_UNREGISTER > (Since Linux 4.3.) > Unregister a memory address range from userfaultfd. > -- > 2.42.0.609.gbb76f46606-goog > -- <https://www.alejandro-colomar.es/>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
