Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-95944-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.199.223 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.199.223;
Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2024 19:31:44 +0200
From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
To: Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@google.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, 
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>, 
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, 
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>, x86@kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 3/3] x86/mm: cleanup prctl_enable_tagged_addr()
 nr_bits error checking
Message-ID: <j3zncd7dxc6kzk5sdytqulkk76cluq6zctklpasa3y4ig3vwku@ibabr336aqv6>
References: <20240307133916.3782068-1-yosryahmed@google.com>
 <20240307133916.3782068-4-yosryahmed@google.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20240307133916.3782068-4-yosryahmed@google.com>

On Thu, Mar 07, 2024 at 01:39:16PM +0000, Yosry Ahmed wrote:
> In prctl_enable_tagged_addr(), we check that nr_bits is in the correct
> range, but we do so in a twisted if/else block where the correct case is
> sandwiched between two error cases doing exactly the same thing.
> 
> Simplify the if condition and pull the correct case outside with the
> rest of the success code path.

I'm okay either way.

I structured the code this way as I had separate patch that adds also
LAM_U48. But it is unlikely to get upstreamed.

-- 
  Kiryl Shutsemau / Kirill A. Shutemov