Re: [PATCH 6/6] mm: change to return bool for the MMU notifier's young flag check

From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com>
Cc: "Lorenzo Stoakes (Oracle)" <ljs@kernel.org>,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, david@kernel.org,
	 Liam.Howlett@oracle.com, vbabka@kernel.org, rppt@kernel.org,
	 surenb@google.com, mhocko@suse.com,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,  x86@kernel.org,
	linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
	 linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
	 kvm@vger.kernel.org, open <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] mm: change to return bool for the MMU notifier's young flag check
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2026 10:52:51 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <adVEc4zUVVxRiEJG@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2a216ee2-aebb-42ba-b2aa-826488448bbe@linux.alibaba.com>

On Tue, Apr 07, 2026, Baolin Wang wrote:
> On 4/4/26 7:12 AM, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 20, 2026, Baolin Wang wrote:
> > > > > -static __always_inline int kvm_age_hva_range(struct mmu_notifier *mn,
> > > > > -						unsigned long start,
> > > > > -						unsigned long end,
> > > > > -						gfn_handler_t handler,
> > > > > -						bool flush_on_ret)
> > > > > +static __always_inline bool kvm_age_hva_range(struct mmu_notifier *mn,
> > > > > +					      unsigned long start,
> > > > > +					      unsigned long end,
> > > > > +					      gfn_handler_t handler,
> > > > > +					      bool flush_on_ret)
> > > > 
> > > > Can we please fix this terrrible indentation while we're here :)?
> > > > 
> > > > static __always_inline bool kvm_age_hva_range(struct mmu_notifier *mn,
> > > > 		unsigned long start, unsigned long end, gfn_handler_t handler,
> > > > 		bool flush_on_ret)
> > > > 
> > > > Would be nicer, thanks!
> > 
> > No, please keep this as-is.  KVM's preferred style is exactly this (and I personally
> > find mm's style much harder to parse).
> 
> Um, Andrew has already queued v2[1] into the mm-stable branch. Do you want
> me to send a follow-up patch to restore the original KVM coding style?

Nah, not worth the churn.  Thanks though!