summaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
path: root/mm/userfaultfd.c
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorMatthew Wilcox (Oracle) <willy@infradead.org>2024-01-01 09:38:48 +0000
committerAndrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>2024-01-05 10:17:43 -0800
commitbcd30d4cd937e8e15c3986358c5e601135475ce1 (patch)
tree5627fe36447141833d470f0f480ff819dafeffe4 /mm/userfaultfd.c
parent501a06fe8e4c185bbda371b8cedbdf1b23a633d8 (diff)
downloadlinux-bcd30d4cd937e8e15c3986358c5e601135475ce1.tar.gz
linux-bcd30d4cd937e8e15c3986358c5e601135475ce1.tar.bz2
linux-bcd30d4cd937e8e15c3986358c5e601135475ce1.zip
buffer: fix unintended successful return
If try_to_free_buffers() succeeded and then folio_alloc_buffers() failed, grow_dev_folio() would return success. This would be incorrect; memory allocation failure is supposed to result in a failure. It's a harmless bug; the caller will simply go around the loop one more time and grow_dev_folio() will correctly return a failure that time. But it was an unintended change and looks like a more serious bug than it is. While I'm in here, improve the commentary about why we return success even though we failed. Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20240101093848.2017115-1-willy@infradead.org Fixes: 6d840a18773f ("buffer: return bool from grow_dev_folio()") Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) <willy@infradead.org> Reported-by: Ryusuke Konishi <konishi.ryusuke@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Diffstat (limited to 'mm/userfaultfd.c')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions