Hi,
On Thu, Mar 09, 2023 at 06:57:13PM +0500, Muhammad Usama Anjum wrote:
> Define uffd_wp_range() for the cases when CONFIG_USERFAULTFD isn't set.
>
> Signed-off-by: Muhammad Usama Anjum <usama.anjum@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> include/linux/userfaultfd_k.h | 8 ++++++++
> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/userfaultfd_k.h b/include/linux/userfaultfd_k.h
> index b680c0ec8b85..fd1a1ecdb5f6 100644
> --- a/include/linux/userfaultfd_k.h
> +++ b/include/linux/userfaultfd_k.h
> @@ -182,6 +182,14 @@ extern int userfaultfd_wp_async(struct vm_area_struct *vma);
>
> #else /* CONFIG_USERFAULTFD */
>
> +extern inline long uffd_wp_range(struct mm_struct *dst_mm,
static inline
> + struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> + unsigned long start, unsigned long len,
> + bool enable_wp)
> +{
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
I didn't see uffd_wp_range() defined in the previous patch.
Could be a rebase issue?
In any case, the stub should be defined in the same patch as the actual
function in order not to break bisectability.
> /* mm helpers */
> static inline vm_fault_t handle_userfault(struct vm_fault *vmf,
> unsigned long reason)
> --
> 2.39.2
>
--
Sincerely yours,
Mike.
