[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <874kg930di.fsf@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2021 10:53:37 +0530
From: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.ibm.com>
To: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>, jniethe5@...il.com
Cc: linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] powerpc: Rename probe_kernel_read_inst()
Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu> writes:
> When probe_kernel_read_inst() was created, it was to mimic
> probe_kernel_read() function.
>
> Since then, probe_kernel_read() has been renamed
> copy_from_kernel_nofault().
>
> Rename probe_kernel_read_inst() into copy_from_kernel_nofault_inst().
At first glance I read it as copy from kernel nofault instruction.
How about copy_inst_from_kernel_nofault()?
-aneesh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists