On 5/22/23 10:24, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote: > In all but one instance, mlock_future_check() is treated as a boolean > function despite returning an error code. In one instance, this error code > is ignored and replaced with -ENOMEM. > > This is confusing, and the inversion of true -> failure, false -> success > is not warranted. Convert the function to a bool, lightly refactor and > return true if the check passes, false if not. > > Signed-off-by: Lorenzo Stoakes <lstoakes@xxxxxxxxx> Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@xxxxxxx> > --- > mm/internal.h | 4 ++-- > mm/mmap.c | 33 +++++++++++++++++---------------- > mm/mremap.c | 2 +- > mm/secretmem.c | 2 +- > 4 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/mm/internal.h b/mm/internal.h > index bb6542279599..66dd214b302a 100644 > --- a/mm/internal.h > +++ b/mm/internal.h > @@ -576,8 +576,8 @@ extern long populate_vma_page_range(struct vm_area_struct *vma, > extern long faultin_vma_page_range(struct vm_area_struct *vma, > unsigned long start, unsigned long end, > bool write, int *locked); > -extern int mlock_future_check(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long flags, > - unsigned long len); > +extern bool mlock_future_check(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long flags, > + unsigned long bytes); This would have been good opportunity to drop the extern.
