On Mon, Jun 03, 2019 at 09:16:08AM -0600, Khalid Aziz wrote: > Could you reword above sentence? We are already starting off with > untagged_addr() not being no-op for arm64 and sparc64. It will expand > further potentially. So something more along the lines of "Define it as > noop for architectures that do not support memory tagging". The first > paragraph in the log can also be rewritten to be not specific to arm64. Well, as of this patch this actually is a no-op for everyone. Linus, what do you think of applying this patch (maybe with a slightly fixed up commit log) to 5.2-rc so that we remove a cross dependency between the series?
