On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 7:41 PM, Uma Krishnan
<ukrishn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
>> On Jun 19, 2018, at 12:10 AM, Souptick Joarder <jrdr.linux@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 4:53 AM, Matthew R. Ochs
>> <mrochs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 01:12:04AM +0530, Souptick Joarder 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.
>>>>
>>>> Ref-> commit 1c8f422059ae ("mm: change return type to vm_fault_t")
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Souptick Joarder <jrdr.linux@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>
>>> This looks fine to me.
>>>
>>> FYI that there is another handler for this driver in a series
>>> destined for 4.18 and currently in next/master.
>>>
>>> Acked-by: Matthew R. Ochs <mrochs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>
>>
>> Matthew, is this patch queued for 4.19 ?
>>
> Below is the commit that added fault handler in ocxl. It is in 4.18 rc1 (upstream/master tree)
>
> commit 93b8f8df552c5a30bfddb75a632f1b2a436c2cae
> scsi: cxlflash: Support adapter context mmap and release
No, that's a different patch with commit
93b8f8df552c5a30bfddb75a632f1b2a436c2cae.
Not the patch under discussion in this mail thread :)
Anyway the other patch with commit 93b8f8df552c5a30b also has to be modified
to use new return type vm_fault_t for fault handler ocxlflash_mmap_fault().
Shall I modify and submit the same ?
