228b82211b
Saves repeating "(void __force *)__uptr" but it's less clear. Using the output of PTR_RET() to determine the error rather than just testing IS_ERR() is odd. For example, I *assume* __gptr_to_uptr() never returns NULL? Because the __ret would be 0 for the old code. The new version is clearer, IMHO: it would try to get_user() on that address. If you hate this variant, I can just s/PTR_RET/PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO/ instead. Cc: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com> Cc: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com> Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au> Acked-by: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com> |
||
|---|---|---|
| .. | ||
| diag.c | ||
| gaccess.h | ||
| intercept.c | ||
| interrupt.c | ||
| Kconfig | ||
| kvm-s390.c | ||
| kvm-s390.h | ||
| Makefile | ||
| priv.c | ||
| sigp.c | ||
| trace-s390.h | ||
| trace.h | ||