Re: [PATCH] orangefs: Adding new return type vm_fault_t

From: Mike Marshall <hubcap@omnibond.com>
To: Souptick Joarder <jrdr.linux@gmail.com>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
	Martin Brandenburg <martin@omnibond.com>,
	devel@lists.orangefs.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] orangefs: Adding new return type vm_fault_t
Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2018 08:31:57 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAOg9mSRurxsWaK7hu8SEDvqOX8_54iaAPERY9wrFTj2O5Pn1mA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAFqt6zYAsfdXhRqH_cJPrafbA8x5LYTg-FNzwNXV39dbYV5XsQ@mail.gmail.com>

Yes, I'd be happy to send it in at the 4.19 merge window...

-Mike

On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 1:56 AM, Souptick Joarder <jrdr.linux@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 1:13 AM, Mike Marshall <hubcap@omnibond.com> wrote:
>> Hi...
>>
>> I applied this patch to 4.18.0-rc4. It applied cleanly and there's no xfstests
>> regressions. Sorry if I held you up any...
>>
>> You can add: Tested-By: Mike Marshall <hubcap@omnibond.com>
>>
>
> Thanks Mike. Can we get this patch in queue for 4.19 merge window ?
>
>> -Mike
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 6, 2018 at 10:05 AM, Mike Marshall <hubcap@omnibond.com> wrote:
>>> Souptick Joarder: Any comment for this patch?
>>>
>>> Thanks for sending it <g>...
>>>
>>> I have it in my stack, but I haven't studied it, or xfstested it yet, so
>>> no useful comments yet...
>>>
>>> -Mike
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jul 6, 2018 at 2:44 AM, Souptick Joarder <jrdr.linux@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 12:12 AM, Souptick Joarder <jrdr.linux@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Use new return type vm_fault_t for fault handler. For now,
>>>>> this is just documenting that the function returns a VM_FAULT
>>>>> value rather than an errno. Once all instances are converted,
>>>>> vm_fault_t will become a distinct type.
>>>>>
>>>>> See the following
>>>>> commit 1c8f422059ae ("mm: change return type to vm_fault_t")
>>>>>
>>>>> Fixed checkpatch.pl warning.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Souptick Joarder <jrdr.linux@gmail.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>  fs/orangefs/file.c | 19 ++++++++++---------
>>>>>  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/fs/orangefs/file.c b/fs/orangefs/file.c
>>>>> index db0b521..a5a2fe7 100644
>>>>> --- a/fs/orangefs/file.c
>>>>> +++ b/fs/orangefs/file.c
>>>>> @@ -528,18 +528,19 @@ static long orangefs_ioctl(struct file *file, unsigned int cmd, unsigned long ar
>>>>>         return ret;
>>>>>  }
>>>>>
>>>>> -static int orangefs_fault(struct vm_fault *vmf)
>>>>> +static vm_fault_t orangefs_fault(struct vm_fault *vmf)
>>>>>  {
>>>>>         struct file *file = vmf->vma->vm_file;
>>>>> -       int rc;
>>>>> -       rc = orangefs_inode_getattr(file->f_mapping->host, 0, 1,
>>>>> +       int ret;
>>>>> +
>>>>> +       ret = orangefs_inode_getattr(file->f_mapping->host, 0, 1,
>>>>>             STATX_SIZE);
>>>>> -       if (rc == -ESTALE)
>>>>> -               rc = -EIO;
>>>>> -       if (rc) {
>>>>> -               gossip_err("%s: orangefs_inode_getattr failed, "
>>>>> -                   "rc:%d:.\n", __func__, rc);
>>>>> -               return rc;
>>>>> +       if (ret == -ESTALE)
>>>>> +               ret = -EIO;
>>>>> +       if (ret) {
>>>>> +               gossip_err("%s: orangefs_inode_getattr failed, ret:%d:.\n",
>>>>> +                               __func__, ret);
>>>>> +               return VM_FAULT_SIGBUS;
>>>>>         }
>>>>>         return filemap_fault(vmf);
>>>>>  }
>>>>> --
>>>>> 1.9.1
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Any comment for this patch ?