jump_label: Clarify condition in static_key_fast_inc_not_disabled()

The second part of

      if (v <= 0 || (v + 1) < 0)

is not immediately obvious that it acts as overflow protection.

Check explicitely for v == INT_MAX instead and add a proper comment how
this is used at the call sites.

Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <[email protected]>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/[email protected]

Author: KAGA-KOKO

kernel/jump_label.c

@@ -132,12 +132,15 @@ bool static_key_fast_inc_not_disabled(struct static_key *key)
 	/*
 	 * Negative key->enabled has a special meaning: it sends
 	 * static_key_slow_inc/dec() down the slow path, and it is non-zero
-	 * so it counts as "enabled" in jump_label_update().  Note that
-	 * atomic_inc_unless_negative() checks >= 0, so roll our own.
+	 * so it counts as "enabled" in jump_label_update().
+	 *
+	 * The INT_MAX overflow condition is either used by the networking
+	 * code to reset or detected in the slow path of
+	 * static_key_slow_inc_cpuslocked().
 	 */
 	v = atomic_read(&key->enabled);
 	do {
-		if (v <= 0 || (v + 1) < 0)
+		if (v <= 0 || v == INT_MAX)
 			return false;
 	} while (!likely(atomic_try_cmpxchg(&key->enabled, &v, v + 1)));