Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 16 Mar 2023 09:02:11 +0200 | From | Mike Rapoport <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v11 2/7] userfaultfd: Define dummy uffd_wp_range() |
| |
Hi,
On Thu, Mar 09, 2023 at 06:57:13PM +0500, Muhammad Usama Anjum wrote: > Define uffd_wp_range() for the cases when CONFIG_USERFAULTFD isn't set. > > Signed-off-by: Muhammad Usama Anjum <usama.anjum@collabora.com> > --- > include/linux/userfaultfd_k.h | 8 ++++++++ > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/include/linux/userfaultfd_k.h b/include/linux/userfaultfd_k.h > index b680c0ec8b85..fd1a1ecdb5f6 100644 > --- a/include/linux/userfaultfd_k.h > +++ b/include/linux/userfaultfd_k.h > @@ -182,6 +182,14 @@ extern int userfaultfd_wp_async(struct vm_area_struct *vma); > > #else /* CONFIG_USERFAULTFD */ > > +extern inline long uffd_wp_range(struct mm_struct *dst_mm,
static inline
> + struct vm_area_struct *vma, > + unsigned long start, unsigned long len, > + bool enable_wp) > +{ > + return 0; > +} > +
I didn't see uffd_wp_range() defined in the previous patch. Could be a rebase issue?
In any case, the stub should be defined in the same patch as the actual function in order not to break bisectability.
> /* mm helpers */ > static inline vm_fault_t handle_userfault(struct vm_fault *vmf, > unsigned long reason) > -- > 2.39.2 >
-- Sincerely yours, Mike.
| |