On Fri 30-09-16 02:10:14, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 06:08:06PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> > Currently we have two different structures for passing fault information
> > around - struct vm_fault and struct fault_env. DAX will need more
> > information in struct vm_fault to handle its faults so the content of
> > that structure would become event closer to fault_env. Furthermore it
> > would need to generate struct fault_env to be able to call some of the
> > generic functions. So at this point I don't think there's much use in
> > keeping these two structures separate. Just embed into struct vm_fault
> > all that is needed to use it for both purposes.
>
> Looks sensible, and I wonder why it's not been like that from
> the start. But given that you touched all users of the virtual_address
> member earlier: any reason not to move everyone to the unmasked variant
> there and avoid having to pass the address twice?
Hum, right, probably makes sense. I'll do that for the next version.
Honza
--
Jan Kara <[email protected]>
SUSE Labs, CR
_______________________________________________
Linux-nvdimm mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvdimm
