Re: [PATCH v2 4/7] mm/x86: Drop two unnecessary pud_leaf() definitions

[Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>]

On Mon, Mar 04, 2024 at 09:03:34AM -0400, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 29, 2024 at 04:42:55PM +0800, peterx@redhat.com wrote:
> > From: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
> > 
> > pud_leaf() has a fallback macro defined in include/linux/pgtable.h already.
> > Drop the extra two for x86.
> > 
> > Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> > Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
> > Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
> > Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
> > Cc: x86@kernel.org
> > Signed-off-by: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
> > ---
> >  arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable.h      | 1 -
> >  include/asm-generic/pgtable-nopmd.h | 1 -
> >  2 files changed, 2 deletions(-)
> 
> Reviewed-by: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
> 
> > @@ -31,7 +31,6 @@ static inline int pud_none(pud_t pud)		{ return 0; }
> >  static inline int pud_bad(pud_t pud)		{ return 0; }
> >  static inline int pud_present(pud_t pud)	{ return 1; }
> >  static inline int pud_user(pud_t pud)		{ return 0; }
> > -static inline int pud_leaf(pud_t pud)		{ return 0; }
> 
> It would be nice to have a final patch making the signatures
> consistent on all the arch inlines, it should return bool not int.

Makes sense, will do, thanks.

-- 
Peter Xu