From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from verein.lst.de (verein.lst.de [213.95.11.211]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 467562C81 for ; Wed, 24 Nov 2021 06:52:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: by verein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id 5343868AFE; Wed, 24 Nov 2021 07:52:28 +0100 (CET) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2021 07:52:28 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: "Darrick J. Wong" Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Dan Williams , Mike Snitzer , Ira Weiny , dm-devel@redhat.com, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, nvdimm@lists.linux.dev, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-erofs@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 18/29] fsdax: decouple zeroing from the iomap buffered I/O code Message-ID: <20211124065228.GC7075@lst.de> References: <20211109083309.584081-1-hch@lst.de> <20211109083309.584081-19-hch@lst.de> <20211123225315.GM266024@magnolia> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: nvdimm@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20211123225315.GM266024@magnolia> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) On Tue, Nov 23, 2021 at 02:53:15PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > -s64 dax_iomap_zero(loff_t pos, u64 length, struct iomap *iomap) > > +static loff_t dax_zero_iter(struct iomap_iter *iter, bool *did_zero) > > Shouldn't this return value remain s64 to match iomap_iter.processed? I'll switch it over. Given that loff_t is always the same as s64 it shouldn't really matter. (same for the others)