Re: [PATCH 3/5] x86/vdso: Fix function reference in comment

[Vincenzo Frascino <vincenzo.frascino@arm.com>]

On 01/07/2024 15:47, Anna-Maria Behnsen wrote:
> Replace the reference to the non-existent function arch_vdso_cycles_valid()
> by the proper function arch_vdso_cycles_ok().
> 
> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
> Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
> Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
> Cc: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
> Cc: x86@kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@linutronix.de>

Reviewed-by: Vincenzo Frascino <vincenzo.frascino@arm.com>

> ---
>  arch/x86/include/asm/vdso/gettimeofday.h | 5 ++---
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/vdso/gettimeofday.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/vdso/gettimeofday.h
> index 0ef36190abe6..b2d2df026f6e 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/vdso/gettimeofday.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/vdso/gettimeofday.h
> @@ -328,9 +328,8 @@ static __always_inline u64 vdso_calc_ns(const struct vdso_data *vd, u64 cycles,
>  	 * due to unsigned comparison.
>  	 *
>  	 * Due to the MSB/Sign-bit being used as invalid marker (see
> -	 * arch_vdso_cycles_valid() above), the effective mask is S64_MAX,
> -	 * but that case is also unlikely and will also take the unlikely path
> -	 * here.
> +	 * arch_vdso_cycles_ok() above), the effective mask is S64_MAX, but that
> +	 * case is also unlikely and will also take the unlikely path here.
>  	 */
>  	if (unlikely(delta > vd->max_cycles)) {
>  		/*
> 

-- 
Regards,
Vincenzo