[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] x86/vpt: Simplify locking argument to write_{un}lock
- To: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>, Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>
- From: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2021 10:22:01 -0400
- Arc-authentication-results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=oracle.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=oracle.com; dkim=pass header.d=oracle.com; arc=none
- Arc-message-signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=hnP7IGQbW/1jxTwXpPFxZmKyHXY7XTWQhBlCiFkNxEg=; b=BRbgerVCX0WL93it/97Rp5JLBIKhUuTLnXBi0nrPShdZGNH82Kq66XXBZTxISKloaoKc4yaoV2qcoaVfMSO0nFOzK0ELKlBE5FZMS71+7mNIsPSagZDD8pLztyX2y7gVKKoNkWpecwN6hZziG+YTf49RYSvUPhOMGMDRloGujh4jC+LScH7fbFiM3bQW7W8+nwaOAncrz5OhV+DgsW+09P329a8raU6p0z9gXUA9JlowXDYzTD7xYGKyA3W5Mph26PI1/QfdCpu0xd0QOlGi9C5urzd7rO/4pVtb8CCw9k/m+RRQat/BlH5AEVSSmM7WyjlJf4bkQN3c4w168RaPYg==
- Arc-seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=WdE4GKtw9Cv360rKb4Z8mm7ATo/lhxjmx8O5kVYM53SIl5wOKeahgJ+66ax/DsjBRD85QcYVGtGRfqXLU1MFqfeHYz5fQQCd0S9fCBCQuHIAg6BRj5jdEKXFJq10mGwyMT/Zuwu+Rjp4eaieUKTMWxr7faIXvOr/Ix9q0i5VHa6fNfK688193EXlhiQpkVobr93mgmPnYeo4xqMTxabcWm+fxAWwMe2dfDbb+amksQ5eDiTGTcgWO2ocxiICxGX75nJfcFQL3JnCTwOv91hjtrMLZHeqQNJTjPLZuhRwg4Z0pF/mRsjKvM8FEh4fCSR6Z4zjIY/MsAT3sk0sOQAsXg==
- Authentication-results: xenproject.org; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;xenproject.org; dmarc=none action=none header.from=oracle.com;
- Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx, wl@xxxxxxx, stephen.s.brennan@xxxxxxxxxx, iwj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Delivery-date: Tue, 30 Mar 2021 14:22:39 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
On 3/30/21 8:49 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 30.03.2021 09:36, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 05:15:02PM -0400, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
>>> Make both create_periodic_time() and pt_adjust_vcpu() call
>>> write_{un}lock with similar arguments.
> This makes it sound like you adjust both functions, but really
> you bring the latter in line with the former. Would you mind me
> adjusting the wording along these lines while (and when)
> committing?
Yes, please.
>
>> Might be worth adding that this is not a functional change?
>>
>>> Requested-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
>>> Signed-off-by: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> Either way:
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>>> ---
>>> New patch.
>>>
>>> I ended up doing what Jan asked --- create_periodic_time() is also using
>>> different
>>> start pointers in lock() and unlock().
>> Hm, I'm not sure I'm following, create_periodic_time uses 'v' in both
>> write_{un}lock calls, which doesn't change across the function.
> I guess Boris merely meant to express that there's already precedent?
Yes, that's what I wanted to say. But clearly not what I actually said.
-boris
|
