On Mon, Mar 02, 2026 at 03:57:50PM +0100, David Hildenbrand (Arm) wrote:
> > /* Initialize to an unsupported value */
> > -unsigned int page_reporting_order = -1;
> > +unsigned int page_reporting_order = PAGE_REPORTING_ORDER_UNSPECIFIED;
> >
> > static int page_order_update_notify(const char *val, const struct
> > kernel_param *kp)
> > {
> > @@ -25,12 +25,7 @@ static int page_order_update_notify(const char *val,
> > const struct kernel_param *
> >
> > static const struct kernel_param_ops page_reporting_param_ops = {
> > .set = &page_order_update_notify,
> > - /*
> > - * For the get op, use param_get_int instead of param_get_uint.
> > - * This is to make sure that when unset the initialized value of
> > - * -1 is shown correctly
> > - */
> > - .get = ¶m_get_int,
> > + .get = ¶m_get_uint,
> > };
>
> I think the change to page_reporting_order (and param_get_int) should
> come after patch #4.
>
> Otherwise, you temporarily change the semantics of
> page_reporting_param_ops() etc.
>
> So you should perform the page_reporting_order changes either in patch
> #4 or in a new patch #5.
>
> Apart from that LGTM.
>
> --
> Cheers,
>
> David
Sounds good. Ill add a #5.
Thanks,
Yuvraj