2019-01-04 19:21:38

by Souptick Joarder

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: [PATCH] fs/dax: Convert to use vmf_error()

This code is converted to use vmf_error().

Signed-off-by: Souptick Joarder <[email protected]>
---
fs/dax.c | 4 +---
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/dax.c b/fs/dax.c
index 48132ec..ed39161 100644
--- a/fs/dax.c
+++ b/fs/dax.c
@@ -1220,9 +1220,7 @@ static vm_fault_t dax_fault_return(int error)
{
if (error == 0)
return VM_FAULT_NOPAGE;
- if (error == -ENOMEM)
- return VM_FAULT_OOM;
- return VM_FAULT_SIGBUS;
+ return vmf_error(error);
}

/*
--
1.9.1



2019-01-14 04:30:31

by Souptick Joarder

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs/dax: Convert to use vmf_error()

On Sat, Jan 5, 2019 at 12:50 AM Souptick Joarder <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> This code is converted to use vmf_error().
>
> Signed-off-by: Souptick Joarder <[email protected]>

Any comment on this patch ?
> ---
> fs/dax.c | 4 +---
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/dax.c b/fs/dax.c
> index 48132ec..ed39161 100644
> --- a/fs/dax.c
> +++ b/fs/dax.c
> @@ -1220,9 +1220,7 @@ static vm_fault_t dax_fault_return(int error)
> {
> if (error == 0)
> return VM_FAULT_NOPAGE;
> - if (error == -ENOMEM)
> - return VM_FAULT_OOM;
> - return VM_FAULT_SIGBUS;
> + return vmf_error(error);
> }
>
> /*
> --
> 1.9.1
>

2019-01-14 09:00:18

by Jan Kara

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs/dax: Convert to use vmf_error()

On Sat 05-01-19 00:54:11, Souptick Joarder wrote:
> This code is converted to use vmf_error().
>
> Signed-off-by: Souptick Joarder <[email protected]>

Dan, you are merging DAX patches these days. So probably you should add
yourself to 'FILESYSTEM DIRECT ACCESS (DAX)' in MAINTAINERs. Or I can start
picking patches for fsdax to my tree if you are too busy but I think your
tree is easier as there are less chances for conflicts etc.

In either case this patch looks OK to me so feel free to add

Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <[email protected]>

Honza

> ---
> fs/dax.c | 4 +---
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/dax.c b/fs/dax.c
> index 48132ec..ed39161 100644
> --- a/fs/dax.c
> +++ b/fs/dax.c
> @@ -1220,9 +1220,7 @@ static vm_fault_t dax_fault_return(int error)
> {
> if (error == 0)
> return VM_FAULT_NOPAGE;
> - if (error == -ENOMEM)
> - return VM_FAULT_OOM;
> - return VM_FAULT_SIGBUS;
> + return vmf_error(error);
> }
>
> /*
> --
> 1.9.1
>
--
Jan Kara <[email protected]>
SUSE Labs, CR

2019-01-14 22:32:33

by Dan Williams

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs/dax: Convert to use vmf_error()

On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 12:59 AM Jan Kara <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Sat 05-01-19 00:54:11, Souptick Joarder wrote:
> > This code is converted to use vmf_error().
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Souptick Joarder <[email protected]>
>
> Dan, you are merging DAX patches these days. So probably you should add
> yourself to 'FILESYSTEM DIRECT ACCESS (DAX)' in MAINTAINERs.

Sounds good, I'll merge this and get MAINTAINERs fixed up.

> Or I can start
> picking patches for fsdax to my tree if you are too busy but I think your
> tree is easier as there are less chances for conflicts etc.
>
> In either case this patch looks OK to me so feel free to add
>
> Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <[email protected]>
>
> Honza
>
> > ---
> > fs/dax.c | 4 +---
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/dax.c b/fs/dax.c
> > index 48132ec..ed39161 100644
> > --- a/fs/dax.c
> > +++ b/fs/dax.c
> > @@ -1220,9 +1220,7 @@ static vm_fault_t dax_fault_return(int error)
> > {
> > if (error == 0)
> > return VM_FAULT_NOPAGE;
> > - if (error == -ENOMEM)
> > - return VM_FAULT_OOM;
> > - return VM_FAULT_SIGBUS;
> > + return vmf_error(error);
> > }
> >
> > /*
> > --
> > 1.9.1
> >
> --
> Jan Kara <[email protected]>
> SUSE Labs, CR

2019-02-05 02:38:39

by Souptick Joarder

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs/dax: Convert to use vmf_error()

Hi Dan,

On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 4:00 AM Dan Williams <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 12:59 AM Jan Kara <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat 05-01-19 00:54:11, Souptick Joarder wrote:
> > > This code is converted to use vmf_error().
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Souptick Joarder <[email protected]>
> >
> > Dan, you are merging DAX patches these days. So probably you should add
> > yourself to 'FILESYSTEM DIRECT ACCESS (DAX)' in MAINTAINERs.
>
> Sounds good, I'll merge this and get MAINTAINERs fixed up.

This is not reflecting in linux-next. Is this queued for 5.1 ?

>
> > Or I can start
> > picking patches for fsdax to my tree if you are too busy but I think your
> > tree is easier as there are less chances for conflicts etc.
> >
> > In either case this patch looks OK to me so feel free to add
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <[email protected]>
> >
> > Honza
> >
> > > ---
> > > fs/dax.c | 4 +---
> > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/fs/dax.c b/fs/dax.c
> > > index 48132ec..ed39161 100644
> > > --- a/fs/dax.c
> > > +++ b/fs/dax.c
> > > @@ -1220,9 +1220,7 @@ static vm_fault_t dax_fault_return(int error)
> > > {
> > > if (error == 0)
> > > return VM_FAULT_NOPAGE;
> > > - if (error == -ENOMEM)
> > > - return VM_FAULT_OOM;
> > > - return VM_FAULT_SIGBUS;
> > > + return vmf_error(error);
> > > }
> > >
> > > /*
> > > --
> > > 1.9.1
> > >
> > --
> > Jan Kara <[email protected]>
> > SUSE Labs, CR

2019-02-05 02:56:55

by Dan Williams

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs/dax: Convert to use vmf_error()

On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 6:33 PM Souptick Joarder <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi Dan,
>
> On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 4:00 AM Dan Williams <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 12:59 AM Jan Kara <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sat 05-01-19 00:54:11, Souptick Joarder wrote:
> > > > This code is converted to use vmf_error().
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Souptick Joarder <[email protected]>
> > >
> > > Dan, you are merging DAX patches these days. So probably you should add
> > > yourself to 'FILESYSTEM DIRECT ACCESS (DAX)' in MAINTAINERs.
> >
> > Sounds good, I'll merge this and get MAINTAINERs fixed up.
>
> This is not reflecting in linux-next. Is this queued for 5.1 ?

Thanks for the ping, I'll get it queued up shortly.