Re: [PATCH] mm/mmap: refactor mlock_future_check()

[Andrew Morton]

On Mon, 22 May 2023 09:24:12 +0100 Lorenzo Stoakes <lstoakes@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> In all but one instance, mlock_future_check() is treated as a boolean
> function despite returning an error code. In one instance, this error code
> is ignored and replaced with -ENOMEM.
> 
> This is confusing, and the inversion of true -> failure, false -> success
> is not warranted. Convert the function to a bool, lightly refactor and
> return true if the check passes, false if not.

Yup.

I don't think the name does a good job of conveying the
function's use.

> -	if (mlock_future_check(mm, vm_flags, len))
> +	if (!mlock_future_check(mm, vm_flags, len))
>  		return -EAGAIN;

	if (!may_mlock_future(...))

or

	if (!mlock_future_ok(...))

?