From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1760074AbcHaU0A (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Wed, 31 Aug 2016 16:26:00 -0400
Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:48962 "EHLO
        mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1754873AbcHaUZ7 (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Wed, 31 Aug 2016 16:25:59 -0400
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2016 13:25:57 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Reza Arbab <arbab@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
        Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
        Yaowei Bai <baiyaowei@cmss.chinamobile.com>,
        Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
        Xishi Qiu <qiuxishi@huawei.com>,
        David Vrabel <david.vrabel@citrix.com>, Chen Yucong <slaoub@gmail.com>,
        Andrew Banman <abanman@sgi.com>, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH v2] memory-hotplug: fix store_mem_state() return
 value
Message-Id: <20160831132557.c5cf0985e3da5f2850a10b1d@linux-foundation.org>
In-Reply-To: <1472658241-32748-1-git-send-email-arbab@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
References: <20160831150105.GB26702@kroah.com>
        <1472658241-32748-1-git-send-email-arbab@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.4.1 (GTK+ 2.24.23; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Wed, 31 Aug 2016 10:44:01 -0500 Reza Arbab <arbab@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:

> Attempting to online memory which is already online will cause this:
> 
> 1. store_mem_state() called with buf="online"
> 2. device_online() returns 1 because device is already online
> 3. store_mem_state() returns 1
> 4. calling code interprets this as 1-byte buffer read
> 5. store_mem_state() called again with buf="nline"
> 6. store_mem_state() returns -EINVAL
> 
> Example:
> 
> $ cat /sys/devices/system/memory/memory0/state
> online
> $ echo online > /sys/devices/system/memory/memory0/state
> -bash: echo: write error: Invalid argument
> 
> Fix the return value of store_mem_state() so this doesn't happen.

So..  what *does* happen after the patch?  Is some sort of failure still
reported?  Or am I correct in believing that the operation will appear
to have succeeded?  If so, is that desirable?