From e86b298bebf7e799e4b7232e9135799f1947552e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Mike Rapoport Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2017 15:24:32 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] userfaultfd: replace ENOSPC with ESRCH in case mm has gone during copy/zeropage When the process exit races with outstanding mcopy_atomic, it would be better to return ESRCH error. When such race occurs the process and it's mm are going away and returning "no such process" to the uffd monitor seems better fit than ENOSPC. Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1502111545-32305-1-git-send-email-rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport Suggested-by: Michal Hocko Acked-by: Michal Hocko Cc: Andrea Arcangeli Cc: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" Cc: Pavel Emelyanov Cc: Mike Kravetz Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds --- fs/userfaultfd.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/userfaultfd.c b/fs/userfaultfd.c index 06ea26b8c996..b0d5897bc4e6 100644 --- a/fs/userfaultfd.c +++ b/fs/userfaultfd.c @@ -1600,7 +1600,7 @@ static int userfaultfd_copy(struct userfaultfd_ctx *ctx, uffdio_copy.len); mmput(ctx->mm); } else { - return -ENOSPC; + return -ESRCH; } if (unlikely(put_user(ret, &user_uffdio_copy->copy))) return -EFAULT; @@ -1647,7 +1647,7 @@ static int userfaultfd_zeropage(struct userfaultfd_ctx *ctx, uffdio_zeropage.range.len); mmput(ctx->mm); } else { - return -ENOSPC; + return -ESRCH; } if (unlikely(put_user(ret, &user_uffdio_zeropage->zeropage))) return -EFAULT;