On Thu, 2020-12-10 at 12:57 -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> What is the point of a function called probably_on_bare_metal()?
> *Probably*?  The caller can't really do anything with the fact that
> we're not 100% sure this gives the correct answer.  Just call it
> "on_bare_metal()" or something and accept the fact that it might be
> wrong sometimes.

Acknowledging that it's a heuristic is OK, but we should certainly be
clear about whether it has false positives, false negatives, or both.