On 25/10/2018 17:43, Dave Hansen wrote:
+static bool is_address_protected(void *p) +{ + struct page *page; + struct vmap_area *area; + + if (unlikely(!is_vmalloc_addr(p))) + return false; + page = vmalloc_to_page(p); + if (unlikely(!page)) + return false; + wmb(); /* Flush changes to the page table - is it needed? */No.
ok
The rest of this is just pretty verbose and seems to have been very heavily copied and pasted. I guess that's OK for test code, though.
I was tempted to play with macros, as templates to generate tests on the fly, according to the type being passed.
But I was afraid it might generate an even stronger rejection than the rest of the patchset already has.
Would it be acceptable/preferable? -- igor
