From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7852EC433E8 for ; Mon, 20 Jul 2020 09:14:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5378B2080D for ; Mon, 20 Jul 2020 09:14:48 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b="o2uXRpBU" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728130AbgGTJOr (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Jul 2020 05:14:47 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:35800 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728017AbgGTJOp (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Jul 2020 05:14:45 -0400 Received: from merlin.infradead.org (merlin.infradead.org [IPv6:2001:8b0:10b:1231::1]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 90358C0619D2; Mon, 20 Jul 2020 02:14:45 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=merlin.20170209; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version: References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=EpGd6SEaYQtDfwRuX/5QX4nSgxOOCJks5zLX/RcylHI=; b=o2uXRpBUKCj/3z9C8xL2NxsLDH rKrqEdke9+y7xe207kiZRU9MC379GI4gZovgu/FmbG8gR4nxsro7LQolBc01s12sEEIchddhnfxqX 4jvm2gzcB0p4+cybVE9RXmvefsfzt+TJzrw4vh31pRkw3wYYWOHR58N1G9eRMxyMfSV0cBNxHPVTs dcl+yj/dT4hQbBaJBaRevoQTSOhR1OCJy4AfJvmbxWldkPMMaIvh4YXDb8kYYQL/TUyMLrLp14kAw x44frFLYDRGbXy3JcYGVMHEuSC28p3zVgHSHp9eYgwXrRvBo4vQxaRluocS9a3q41UoK9ZFf2Azor X4lLH7RQ==; Received: from j217100.upc-j.chello.nl ([24.132.217.100] helo=noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtpsa (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1jxRsb-0005jK-4L; Mon, 20 Jul 2020 09:14:37 +0000 Received: from hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net (hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net [192.168.1.225]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BED2A306CEE; Mon, 20 Jul 2020 11:14:35 +0200 (CEST) Received: by hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id B0D04205A7673; Mon, 20 Jul 2020 11:14:35 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2020 11:14:35 +0200 From: Peter Zijlstra To: Ira Weiny Cc: Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , Borislav Petkov , Andy Lutomirski , Fenghua Yu , x86@kernel.org, Dave Hansen , Dan Williams , Vishal Verma , Andrew Morton , linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC V2 02/17] x86/fpu: Refactor arch_set_user_pkey_access() for PKS support Message-ID: <20200720091435.GM10769@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <20200717072056.73134-1-ira.weiny@intel.com> <20200717072056.73134-3-ira.weiny@intel.com> <20200717085442.GX10769@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20200717205254.GQ3008823@iweiny-DESK2.sc.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200717205254.GQ3008823@iweiny-DESK2.sc.intel.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 01:52:55PM -0700, Ira Weiny wrote: > On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 10:54:42AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > Then we at least have a little clue wtf the thing does.. Yes I started > > with a rename and then got annoyed at the implementation too. > > On the code I think this is fair. I've also updated the calling function to be > a bit cleaner as well. > > However, I think the name 'update' is a bit misleading. Here is the new > calling code: > > ... > pkru = read_pkru(); > pkru = update_pkey_reg(pkru, pkey, init_val); > write_pkru(pkru); > ... > > > I think it is odd to have a function called update_pkey_reg() called right > before a write_pkru(). Can we call this update_pkey_value? or just 'val'? > Because write_pkru() actually updates the register. Fair enough, update_pkey_val() works fine for me.