From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/20] mm: Join struct fault_env and vm_fault Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2016 02:10:14 -0700 Message-ID: <20160930091014.GB24352@infradead.org> References: <1474992504-20133-1-git-send-email-jack@suse.cz> <1474992504-20133-3-git-send-email-jack@suse.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1474992504-20133-3-git-send-email-jack-AlSwsSmVLrQ@public.gmane.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: linux-nvdimm-bounces-hn68Rpc1hR1g9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org Sender: "Linux-nvdimm" To: Jan Kara Cc: linux-nvdimm-y27Ovi1pjclAfugRpC6u6w@public.gmane.org, linux-mm-Bw31MaZKKs3YtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org, linux-fsdevel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, "Kirill A. Shutemov" List-Id: linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org 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?