> > Or we can avoid returning a value from the helper and avoid passing an > > mm. The callers would be more verbose, they'll have to call > > mm_lam_cr3_mask() and mm_untag_mask() and pass the results into the > > helper (set_tlbstate_lam_mode() or update_cpu_tlbstate_lam()). Another > > advantage of this is that we can move the READ_ONCE to > > switch_mm_irqs_off() and keep the comment here. > > > One thing I don't like about set_tlbstate_lam_mode() is that it's not > obvious that it's writing to "cpu_tlbstate" and its right smack in the > middle of a bunch of other writers to the same thing. > > But I'm also not sure that open-coding it at its three call sites makes > things better overall. > > I honestly don't have any brilliant suggestions. Let me ponder this a little bit and try to come up with something, I think a max of renaming and open-coding could make an improvement. Thanks!
