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 11:16:39 +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>, 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>,
        Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>, 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 12/17] memremap: Add zone device access protection
Message-ID: <20200720091639.GO10769@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <20200717072056.73134-1-ira.weiny@intel.com>
 <20200717072056.73134-13-ira.weiny@intel.com>
 <20200717091053.GZ10769@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20200718050650.GT3008823@iweiny-DESK2.sc.intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20200718050650.GT3008823@iweiny-DESK2.sc.intel.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 10:06:50PM -0700, Ira Weiny wrote:
> 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}()?

works for me, thanks!