Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 17 Jul 2020 22:06:50 -0700 | From | Ira Weiny <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH RFC V2 12/17] memremap: Add zone device access protection |
| |
On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 11:10:53AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 12:20:51AM -0700, ira.weiny@intel.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().
Yea... this function kind of morphed. The issue is that this is also a 'get' with a corresponding 'put'. So I'm at a loss for what makes sense between the 2 functions.
> > How about we call this one devm_pgprot() ?
Dan Williams mentioned to me that the devm is not an appropriate prefix. Thus the 'dev' prefix instead.
How about dev_pgprot_{get,put}()?
Ira
| |