On 9/2/26 22:48, Dave Hansen wrote: > On 9/2/26 04:56, Yeoreum Yun wrote: >> Instead of using hard-coded integer in effective_prot_pXd(), use >> pgtable level enum. > > Does this actually *do* anything? ;) > > I guess it's nice to have a wee bit of type safety from the enum and it > means that you don't have to *know* which level number a PUD is, for > example.
The next patch passes the value to mm_first_pgtable_level(). Not sure what x86's preference is to spell something like that out in the patch description. "Prepare for future code changes that will consume the generic enum pgtable_level from inside effective_prot()." -- Cheers, David
