Re: [PATCH 03/12] kho: add a struct for radix callbacks

[Pratyush Yadav <pratyush@kernel.org>]

On Mon, May 11 2026, Mike Rapoport wrote:

> On Wed, Apr 29, 2026 at 03:39:05PM +0200, Pratyush Yadav wrote:
>> From: "Pratyush Yadav (Google)" <pratyush@kernel.org>
>> 
>> A future commit will add more callbacks for the KHO radix tree. Add a
>> struct for collecting the callbacks.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Pratyush Yadav (Google) <pratyush@kernel.org>
>> ---
[...]
>> --- a/kernel/liveupdate/kexec_handover.c
>> +++ b/kernel/liveupdate/kexec_handover.c
>> @@ -266,16 +266,18 @@ void kho_radix_del_key(struct kho_radix_tree *tree, unsigned long key)
>>  }
>>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kho_radix_del_key);
>>  
>> -static int kho_radix_walk_leaf(struct kho_radix_leaf *leaf,
>> -			       unsigned long key,
>> -			       kho_radix_tree_walk_callback_t cb)
>> +static int kho_radix_walk_leaf(struct kho_radix_leaf *leaf, unsigned long key,
>> +			       const struct kho_radix_walk_cb *cb)
>>  {
>>  	unsigned long *bitmap = (unsigned long *)leaf;
>>  	unsigned int i;
>>  	int err;
>>  
>> +	if (!cb->key)
>> +		return 0;
>> +
>>  	for_each_set_bit(i, bitmap, PAGE_SIZE * BITS_PER_BYTE) {
>> -		err = cb(key | i);
>> +		err = cb->key(key | i);
>
> key(key) reads weird :)
> Can't say I have a good name, maybe key_action()?

I thought the context of it being under a callback struct would make it
more obvious. I don't like key_action() much better TBH, but I don't
have a strong opinion. Perhaps Pasha can suggest a 3rd option and we
pick on randomly ;-)

>
>>  		if (err)
>>  			return err;
>>  	}

-- 
Regards,
Pratyush Yadav