linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] mm: Change return type 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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <CAFqt6zbauQJb29BSP5bdRNXxhfS9Y9FH+=yqODKWF6cnksG20w@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Sat, 12 May 2018 11:55:38 +0530
From:   Souptick Joarder <jrdr.linux@...il.com>
To:     Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
        Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>, mike.kravetz@...cle.com,
        n-horiguchi@...jp.nec.com,
        "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] mm: Change return type to vm_fault_t

On Sat, May 12, 2018 at 11:50 AM, Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 2018-05-12 at 11:47 +0530, Souptick Joarder wrote:
>> Use new return type vm_fault_t for fault handler
>> in struct vm_operations_struct. 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.
>
> trivia:
>
>> diff --git a/include/linux/mm_types.h b/include/linux/mm_types.h
> []
>> @@ -627,7 +627,7 @@ struct vm_special_mapping {
>>        * If non-NULL, then this is called to resolve page faults
>>        * on the special mapping.  If used, .pages is not checked.
>>        */
>> -     int (*fault)(const struct vm_special_mapping *sm,
>> +     vm_fault_t (*fault)(const struct vm_special_mapping *sm,
>>                    struct vm_area_struct *vma,
>>                    struct vm_fault *vmf);
>
>
> It'd be nicer to realign the 2nd and 3rd arguments
> on the subsequent lines.
>
>         vm_fault_t (*fault)(const struct vm_special_mapping *sm,
>                             struct vm_area_struct *vma,
>                             struct vm_fault *vmf);
>

Just now posted v3. Do you want me to send v4 again with
realignment ?