Re: [PATCH v2] fs: Convert return type int to vm_fault_t

[Souptick Joarder]

> Also, the fact that the patch series involves multiple file system is
> a massive pain.  It means I'm going to have to do a separate
> regression test --- or preferably, I would ask *you* to run a file
> system regression test[1] --- to make sure what is *not* a trivial
> patch doesn't break things.  Also, it means that this patch series is
> going to get more complicated to get into kernel, and we may have to
> deal with patch conflicts if this goes in via some third party tree
> (such as Andrew's tree).
>
> [1] https:/thunk.org/gce-xfstests

Sure, I will run the regression.

>
> One way to make life easier is to add the new function with the new
> interface first, and then wait a release cycle, and then move file
> systems over in independant patches.

In last review, you left it to me either to add new function or modify the
input parameters of block_page_mkwrite() to return err to caller.
As block_page_mkwrite() is getting called from 2 places in ext4 & nilfs,
I choose to add new input argument in block_page_mkwrite() rather than
introducing new function and put everything in a single commit.