[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH 2/2] xen: rename wrong named pfn related variables
- To: Juergen Gross <jgross@xxxxxxxx>
- From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2021 11:56:52 +0200
- Arc-authentication-results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=suse.com; dkim=pass header.d=suse.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=oLoIRvGF7swCo/JQNs7ZP8KKxmb6K6petkrTD2/9pNg=; b=OsDrRZNdd5qdfssP5HFO2eY6Dkf8drzI7did/WZIyBoYzusU6AVTH/ufaapp0+T2SLSd8YjKIRP9EEFBhF1aVYcZQ69n57Hr9FhhaqJMmEAFyRr7xb5xb665JGNI5g2DbvFr9atwkQEuRi1z6fM8Bqd/niSN4wE8+6VHJ23twwmk4CLd69x4O97SU+p96K2GnNCGgK71ND5PfR2wYSIPKJ+viM6fdALu1XHOgDzGqfmE27bR6EpulJJ0i8Jo3oK4WremmuENOFgnEALBZIgj8uVfK78lj7apOEIgqcii7ugksr82CHgkiLRkT9ypF3akBGFlEJeeQFK3e/TjaP/Zlg==
- Arc-seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=QtODOFJ+M3pQoZc04NKQBlU06FyPkQC/Pn/iPqpdUniLmooJp0r9NHrTOoqUA/hyJ713309Mmb4P4+qkI2Yi/8r5G0SKmd2DBgux4DjbUazMKdLDic+P89LkXva6ZY8lqQylq6BQ+9CoeMwurL342xEcbkx5wc/58d6FREPCeeQWkOxs6g/Ueb6tTovWyC30Fwv9uOh13uGvsduUG8gn26JehgxYkRO5f7pCMa+RUMM8sMR4+ieYaseygWt4yQAG0Z2dDhFF0+T5Csa5MoioVOG/bwXPaReWkq6OuXMg38TyS4LrtjugCwZcr9G9Sv9VmTUFS6JnFphdwluHOXKgfw==
- Authentication-results: kernel.org; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;kernel.org; dmarc=none action=none header.from=suse.com;
- Cc: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx>, Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>, Borislav Petkov <bp@xxxxxxxxx>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx>, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, x86@xxxxxxxxxx
- Delivery-date: Wed, 16 Jun 2021 09:57:07 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
On 16.06.2021 09:30, Juergen Gross wrote:
> --- a/arch/x86/xen/p2m.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/xen/p2m.c
> @@ -95,8 +95,8 @@ unsigned long *xen_p2m_addr __read_mostly;
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(xen_p2m_addr);
> unsigned long xen_p2m_size __read_mostly;
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(xen_p2m_size);
> -unsigned long xen_max_p2m_pfn __read_mostly;
> -EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(xen_max_p2m_pfn);
> +unsigned long xen_p2m_max_size __read_mostly;
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(xen_p2m_max_size);
Instead of renaming the exported variable (which will break consumers
anyway), how about dropping the apparently unneeded export at this
occasion? Further it looks to me as if xen_p2m_size and this variable
were actually always kept in sync, so I'd like to put up the question
of dropping one of the two.
> @@ -121,7 +121,7 @@ static pte_t *p2m_identity_pte;
> * can avoid scanning the whole P2M (which may be sized to account for
> * hotplugged memory).
> */
> -static unsigned long xen_p2m_last_pfn;
> +static unsigned long xen_p2m_pfn_limit;
As to the comment remark in patch 1: You don't alter the comment
here either, and "limit" still doesn't make clear whether that's an
inclusive or exclusive limit.
Jan
|
