On 18.02.20 17:02, Will Deacon wrote: > On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 07:46:10AM -0800, Sean Christopherson wrote: >> On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 09:27:20AM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote: >>> On 17.02.20 12:10, Christian Borntraeger wrote: >>>> So yes, if everything is setup properly this should not fail in real life >>>> and only we have a kernel (or firmware) bug. >>>> >>> >>> Then, without feedback from other possible users, this should be a void >>> function. So either introduce error handling or convert it to a void for >>> now (and add e.g., BUG_ON and a comment inside the s390x implementation). >> >> My preference would also be for a void function (versus ignoring an int >> return). > > The gup code could certainly handle the error value, although the writeback > is a lot less clear (so a BUG_ON() would seem to be sufficient for now). Sean, David. Can we agree on merging patch 39?
