Re: [PATCH 2/7] uaccess: Add scope guard for bare kernel nofault regions

> diff --git a/include/linux/uaccess.h b/include/linux/uaccess.h
> index 7ae185467347..b25e778ddc38 100644
> --- a/include/linux/uaccess.h
> +++ b/include/linux/uaccess.h
> @@ -653,6 +653,10 @@ do {							\
>  #define __end_kernel_nofault_bare()	do {} while (0)
>  #endif
>
> +DEFINE_LOCK_GUARD_0(__kernel_nofault_bare,
> +		    __begin_kernel_nofault_bare(),
> +		    __end_kernel_nofault_bare())
> +

This isn't a bug, but would an unprefixed guard name such as
kernel_nofault_bare read more consistently at the call sites, alongside
guard(pagefault) a few hundred lines up in the same header?

Every other guard class in the tree uses an unprefixed name, including
the directly comparable one at line 303 in this same file:
DEFINE_LOCK_GUARD_0(pagefault, pagefault_disable(), pagefault_enable()).
The '__' prefix is meaningful on __begin/__end_kernel_nofault_bare()
because those are arch-implementation hooks, but the guard name is the
caller-facing spelling.

>  /**
>   * get_kernel_nofault(): safely attempt to read from a location
>   * @val: read into this variable


---
AI reviewed your patch. Please fix the bug or email reply why it's not a bug.
See: https://github.com/kernel-patches/vmtest/blob/master/ci/claude/README.md

CI run summary: https://github.com/kernel-patches/bpf/actions/runs/32751368606