[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2 of 3] RFC: mem_event: use wait queue when ring is full


  • To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>, Olaf Hering <olaf@xxxxxxxxx>
  • From: Keir Fraser <keir@xxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2011 09:49:51 +0000
  • Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Delivery-date: Wed, 23 Nov 2011 09:50:44 +0000
  • List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
  • Thread-index: AcypxT6NP6mORVscU0SwxgrsysvnHA==
  • Thread-topic: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2 of 3] RFC: mem_event: use wait queue when ring is full

On 23/11/2011 09:44, "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

>>>> + /* VCPU is blocked on mem_paging ring. */
>>>> +#define _VPF_me_mem_paging   4
>>>> +#define VPF_me_mem_paging    (1UL<<_VPF_me_mem_paging)
>>>> + /* VCPU is blocked on mem_access ring. */
>>>> +#define _VPF_me_mem_access   5
>>>> +#define VPF_me_mem_access    (1UL<<_VPF_me_mem_access)
>>> 
>>> Same here - the mem_ seems superfluous.
>> 
>> Mem_event-related flags in a more general grouping do require a mem_ prefix
>> imo. The names need to stand on their own and still be descriptive.
> 
> But me_mem_ is still bogus - I thought the me_ stands for "mem event",
> and then the subsequent mem_ is unnecessary.

I'd get rid of the me_ rather than the mem_. The me_ is too short to be
meaningful really.

 -- Keir



_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel


 


Rackspace

Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.