x86/alternatives: Use non-inverted logic instead of 'tp_order_fail()'

tp_order_fail() uses inverted logic: it returns true in case something
is false, which is only a plus at the IOCCC.

Instead rename it to regular parity as 'text_poke_addr_ordered()',
and adjust the code accordingly.

Also add a comment explaining how the address ordering should be
understood.

No change in functionality intended.

Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>
Cc: "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250411054105.2341982-23-mingo@kernel.org
This commit is contained in:
Ingo Molnar 2025-04-11 07:40:34 +02:00
parent 87836af1ea
commit 2d0cf10a1e

View File

@ -2841,28 +2841,34 @@ static void text_poke_int3_loc_init(struct smp_text_poke_loc *tp, void *addr,
* We hard rely on the tp_vec being ordered; ensure this is so by flushing
* early if needed.
*/
static bool tp_order_fail(void *addr)
static bool text_poke_addr_ordered(void *addr)
{
struct smp_text_poke_loc *tp;
if (!tp_vec_nr)
return false;
return true;
if (!addr) /* force */
return true;
return false;
tp = &tp_vec[tp_vec_nr - 1];
/*
* If the last current entry's address is higher than the
* new entry's address we'd like to add, then ordering
* is violated and we must first flush all pending patching
* requests:
*/
tp = &tp_vec[tp_vec_nr-1];
if ((unsigned long)text_poke_addr(tp) > (unsigned long)addr)
return true;
return false;
return false;
return true;
}
static void smp_text_poke_batch_flush(void *addr)
{
lockdep_assert_held(&text_mutex);
if (tp_vec_nr == TP_VEC_MAX || tp_order_fail(addr)) {
if (tp_vec_nr == TP_VEC_MAX || !text_poke_addr_ordered(addr)) {
smp_text_poke_batch_process(tp_vec, tp_vec_nr);
tp_vec_nr = 0;
}