On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 7:05 PM Theodore Y. Ts'o <tytso@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 05, 2018 at 03:20:16PM +0530, Souptick Joarder wrote: > > > > "fs: convert return type int to vm_fault_t" is still under > > review/discusson and not yet merge > > into linux-next. I am not seeing it into linux-next tree.Can you > > please share the commit id ? > > It's at: 83c0adddcc6ed128168e7b87eaed0c21eac908e4 in the Linux Next > branch. > > Dmitry, can you try reverting this commit and see if it makes the > problem go away? > > Souptick, can we just NACK this patch and completely drop it from all > trees? Ok, I will correct it and post v3. > > I think we need to be a *lot* more careful about this vm_fault_t patch > thing. If you can't be bothered to run xfstests, we need to introduce > a new function which replaces block_page_mkwrite() --- and then let > each file system try to convert over to it at their own pace, after > they've done regression testing. > > - Ted Chris has his opinion, block_page_mkwrite is only called by ext4 and nilfs2 anyway, so converting both callers over should not be a problem, as long as it actually is done properly. Matthew's opinion in other mail thread - > +vm_fault_t block_page_mkwrite(struct vm_area_struct *vma, struct vm_fault *vmf, > + get_block_t get_block, int *err) I don't like returning both the errno and the vm_fault_t. To me that's a sign we need to rethink this interface. I have two suggestions. First, we could allocate a new VM_FAULT_NOSPC bit. Second, we could repurpose one of the existing bits, such as VM_FAULT_RETRY for this purpose. > -int ext4_page_mkwrite(struct vm_fault *vmf) > +vm_fault_t ext4_page_mkwrite(struct vm_fault *vmf) I also think perhaps we could start by _not_ converting block_page_mkwrite(). Just convert ext4_page_mkwrite(), and save converting block_page_mkwrite() for later. Which approach Shall I take ??
