linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH] ext4: Convert int to vm_fault

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAFqt6zYJv7SdkntY7KOBvNyfk-9MRaXBMmkbsc4J7P-tq616DA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 1 Aug 2018 18:56:39 +0530
From:   Souptick Joarder <jrdr.linux@...il.com>
To:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
Cc:     "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>, adilger.kernel@...ger.ca,
        "Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@...cle.com>,
        Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
        Andreas Gruenbacher <agruenba@...hat.com>,
        Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...gle.com>,
        Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, kemi.wang@...el.com,
        Sabyasachi Gupta <sabyasachi.linux@...il.com>,
        Brajeswar Ghosh <brajeswar.linux@...il.com>,
        linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ext4: Convert int to vm_fault_t type

On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 6:43 PM, Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 01, 2018 at 06:34:45PM +0530, Souptick Joarder wrote:
>> > The fact that ext4_page_mkwrite() returns a vm_fault_t, while
>> > block_page_mkwrite() returns an int which then has to get translated
>> > into a vm_fault_t via block_page_mkwrite_return() is I suspect going
>> > to confuse an awful lot of callers.
>>
>> We have also changed block_page_mkwrite() to return vm_fault_t, but in
>> a different patch. Hopefully that patch will be in linux-next tree soon.
>
> I didn't sign off on that, so that's not "we", but "I".  And this is
> completely against everything I've been telling you for this whole effort.
> Patches should each make sense individually.  You can't make this patch
> dependent on another patch without putting that in writing.

It was mistake form my side. Sorry about it.

>
> Leave block_page_mkwrite() alone for now.  Eventually it should return
> a vm_fault_t, probably.  But that patch needs to be delayed at least
> one kernel cycle.

As caller of block_page_mkwrite() are -
fs/ext4/inode.c
fs/nilfs2/file.c

I will merge both changes in a single patch and send it.