[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200717091053.GZ10769@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2020 11:10:53 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: ira.weiny@...el.com
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, x86@...nel.org,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@...el.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC V2 12/17] memremap: Add zone device access protection
On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 12:20:51AM -0700, ira.weiny@...el.com wrote:
> +static pgprot_t dev_protection_enable_get(struct dev_pagemap *pgmap, pgprot_t prot)
> +{
> + if (pgmap->flags & PGMAP_PROT_ENABLED && dev_page_pkey != PKEY_INVALID) {
> + pgprotval_t val = pgprot_val(prot);
> +
> + static_branch_inc(&dev_protection_static_key);
> + prot = __pgprot(val | _PAGE_PKEY(dev_page_pkey));
> + }
> + return prot;
> +}
Every other pgprot modifying function is called pgprot_*(), although I
suppose we have the exceptions phys_mem_access_prot() and dma_pgprot().
How about we call this one devm_pgprot() ?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists