On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 12:13:32PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 04:01:14PM -0600, Ross Zwisler wrote: > > On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 02:25:10PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > > On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 01:51:01PM -0600, Ross Zwisler wrote: > > > > From: Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > > The function return values are confusing with the way the function is > > > > named. We expect a true or false return value but it actually returns > > > > 0/-errno. This makes the code very confusing. Changing the return values > > > > to return a bool where if DAX is supported then return true and no DAX > > > > support returns false. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > Signed-off-by: Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > Looks ok, do you want me to pull the first two patches through the xfs > > > tree? > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Thanks for the review. > > > > I'm not sure what's best. If you do that then Mike will need to have a DM > > branch for the rest of the series based on your stable commits, yea? > > > > Mike what would you prefer? > > I /was/ about to say that I would pull in the first two patches, but now > I can't get xfs to mount with pmem at all, and have no way of testing > this...? I'm not sure what's up - I'll dig in and find out. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
