Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Mon, 20 Jul 2020 11:14:35 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To:     Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@intel.com>
Cc:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
        Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>, x86@kernel.org,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
        Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@intel.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        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

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.