Re: [PATCH 6/19] UML - hppfs fixes

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Jeff Dike
Date: Monday, April 28, 2008 - 8:29 am

On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 04:31:32PM +0800, WANG Cong wrote:

Actually, this isn't as wrong as it looks. copy_to_user returns what
hasn't been copied (rem == remaining).  So, I think the mistake is to
return -EFAULT here.  Returning the short count would be right, unless
rem == count, in which case we return -EFAULT.

       	      	 Jeff

-- 
Work email - jdike at linux dot intel dot com
--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[PATCH 6/19] UML - hppfs fixes, Jeff Dike, (Fri Apr 25, 10:56 am)
Re: [PATCH 6/19] UML - hppfs fixes, WANG Cong, (Sat Apr 26, 1:31 am)
Re: [PATCH 6/19] UML - hppfs fixes, Jeff Dike, (Mon Apr 28, 8:16 am)
Re: [PATCH 6/19] UML - hppfs fixes, Jeff Dike, (Mon Apr 28, 8:29 am)
Re: [PATCH 6/19] UML - hppfs fixes, WANG Cong, (Tue Apr 29, 1:04 am)