On Thu, Oct 27, 2022 at 02:11:22PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> From: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> The kernel robot complained about this:
>
> >> fs/xfs/xfs_file.c:1266:31: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in return expression (different base types) @@ expected int @@ got restricted vm_fault_t @@
> fs/xfs/xfs_file.c:1266:31: sparse: expected int
> fs/xfs/xfs_file.c:1266:31: sparse: got restricted vm_fault_t
> fs/xfs/xfs_file.c:1314:21: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in assignment (different base types) @@ expected restricted vm_fault_t [usertype] ret @@ got int @@
> fs/xfs/xfs_file.c:1314:21: sparse: expected restricted vm_fault_t [usertype] ret
> fs/xfs/xfs_file.c:1314:21: sparse: got int
>
> Fix the incorrect return type for these two functions.
>
> While we're at it, make the !fsdax version return VM_FAULT_SIGBUS
> because a zero return value will cause some callers to try to lock
> vmf->page, which we never set here.
>
> Fixes: ea6c49b784f0 ("xfs: support CoW in fsdax mode")
> Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> v2: less confusing commit message, add a debug assert to the !fsdax case
> ---
Looks fine to me.
Reviewed-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@xxxxxxxxxx>
--
Dave Chinner
david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
