Re: [PATCH 1/5] mm/mseal: always define VM_SEALED

[David Hildenbrand]

On 14.07.25 15:00, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote:
> There is no reason to treat VM_SEALED in a special way, in each other case
> in which a VMA flag is unavailable due to configuration, we simply assign
> that flag to VM_NONE, make VM_SEALED consistent with all other VMA flags in
> this respect.
>
> Additionally, use the next available bit for VM_SEALED, 42, rather than
> arbitrarily putting it at 63 and update the declaration to match all other
> VMA flags.
>
> No functional change intended.
>
> Signed-off-by: Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---

Acked-by: David Hildenbrand <david@xxxxxxxxxx>

--
Cheers,

David / dhildenb