[PATCH v1 08/11] x86/mm/pat: remove strict_prot parameter from reserve_pfn_range()

[David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>]

Always set to 0, so let's remove it.

Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
---
 arch/x86/mm/pat/memtype.c | 12 +++---------
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/pat/memtype.c b/arch/x86/mm/pat/memtype.c
index 668ebf0065157..57e3ced4c28cb 100644
--- a/arch/x86/mm/pat/memtype.c
+++ b/arch/x86/mm/pat/memtype.c
@@ -858,8 +858,7 @@ int memtype_kernel_map_sync(u64 base, unsigned long size,
  * Reserved non RAM regions only and after successful memtype_reserve,
  * this func also keeps identity mapping (if any) in sync with this new prot.
  */
-static int reserve_pfn_range(u64 paddr, unsigned long size, pgprot_t *vma_prot,
-				int strict_prot)
+static int reserve_pfn_range(u64 paddr, unsigned long size, pgprot_t *vma_prot)
 {
 	int is_ram = 0;
 	int ret;
@@ -895,8 +894,7 @@ static int reserve_pfn_range(u64 paddr, unsigned long size, pgprot_t *vma_prot,
 		return ret;
 
 	if (pcm != want_pcm) {
-		if (strict_prot ||
-		    !is_new_memtype_allowed(paddr, size, want_pcm, pcm)) {
+		if (!is_new_memtype_allowed(paddr, size, want_pcm, pcm)) {
 			memtype_free(paddr, paddr + size);
 			pr_err("x86/PAT: %s:%d map pfn expected mapping type %s for [mem %#010Lx-%#010Lx], got %s\n",
 			       current->comm, current->pid,
@@ -906,10 +904,6 @@ static int reserve_pfn_range(u64 paddr, unsigned long size, pgprot_t *vma_prot,
 			       cattr_name(pcm));
 			return -EINVAL;
 		}
-		/*
-		 * We allow returning different type than the one requested in
-		 * non strict case.
-		 */
 		pgprot_set_cachemode(vma_prot, pcm);
 	}
 
@@ -959,7 +953,7 @@ int pfnmap_track(unsigned long pfn, unsigned long size, pgprot_t *prot)
 {
 	const resource_size_t paddr = (resource_size_t)pfn << PAGE_SHIFT;
 
-	return reserve_pfn_range(paddr, size, prot, 0);
+	return reserve_pfn_range(paddr, size, prot);
 }
 
 void pfnmap_untrack(unsigned long pfn, unsigned long size)
-- 
2.49.0