On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 07:08:44PM +0530, Souptick Joarder wrote:> Use new return type vm_fault_t for fault handler. 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. > > Reference id -> 1c8f422059ae ("mm: change return type to > vm_fault_t")Hmm, that commit isn't yet in drm-misc-next. Will drm-misc-next merge with 4.17-rcX soon? cheers, Gerd
On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 12:49:24PM +0200, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:> On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 07:08:44PM +0530, Souptick Joarder wrote: > > Use new return type vm_fault_t for fault handler. 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. > > > > Reference id -> 1c8f422059ae ("mm: change return type to > > vm_fault_t") > > Hmm, that commit isn't yet in drm-misc-next. > Will drm-misc-next merge with 4.17-rcX soon?For backmerge requests you need to cc/ping the drm-misc maintainers. Adding them. I think the hold-up also was that Dave was on vacations still. -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch
On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 02:11:51PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:> On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 12:49:24PM +0200, Gerd Hoffmann wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 07:08:44PM +0530, Souptick Joarder wrote: > > > Use new return type vm_fault_t for fault handler. 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. > > > > > > Reference id -> 1c8f422059ae ("mm: change return type to > > > vm_fault_t") > > > > Hmm, that commit isn't yet in drm-misc-next. > > Will drm-misc-next merge with 4.17-rcX soon? > > For backmerge requests you need to cc/ping the drm-misc maintainers. > Adding them. I think the hold-up also was that Dave was on vacations > still.Ah, ok. So my expectation that a backmerge happens anyway after -rc1/2 is in line with reality, it is just to be delayed this time. I'll stay tuned ;) cheers, Gerd
Hi,> > So my expectation that a backmerge happens anyway after -rc1/2 is in > > line with reality, it is just to be delayed this time. I'll stay > > tuned ;) > > Is this patch already merged in drm-misc-next tree ?Pushed now. cheers, Gerd