[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH 1/5] x86: support cache-writeback in flush_area_local() et al
- To: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>
- From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2023 10:54:58 +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-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-1; bh=FzHe1lBJgLijKLEEgidhwjdq1Ta8y0+4RrHR7zra7tE=; b=RqKqh5qET2C04a0vXZJ44ygx6br1+ZDI4xgZwwzwPts61JmvHQ4WE5uMTsQ7qpOhTr8d2I9mR/Un1jz0sXr/Ve1LnmK7a+XCiT7VVjQ9/nArgXdAkqXAq6Cy5GhGfJCiO4QErq75y+x/q46DnEIL8KSWwhkb/cek/C1UVWdGxtQxx/bPZNkCs4eeU4uNmOib5d16gakg4ONAKmhPQvFG6VpzEvDk+2njJTeq8FLPBfMVC4ouW8iWziv+snxV3MERxT+E5CoJ67rSz/caF4lqJYmWgEPHgwx90UeBBwxmVWBWFT+Y64TnAAjoKFDmOrzw6P/wEWM3pJxtXFIk6ea9Nw==
- Arc-seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=Rk+34WOiU3m+Cxm5lARyaX2feDHnb6yVoH3+l9VBuR4EyFYLR8Vt4u+XDuI6J/kmMZdDWnHB3N4PZxdmXcdU7Kkt2BQV4NfRC/3UA1SZjMDSRi4U8JxBbrP6YHs8JFlErdbrxI3nczo7mCJX1bIq13hLMMXaqd5tDdK4EJjEhgPpuLQy+DLGxlDb5W/HDQx822K87a+vclc9EK7Ig7k+A9ISbzfTH7AqvMrGegEiR/5GOVNIg/6fxGlJEB736FIQxPlAo+0FOrzRfQjA84yTXZGwbmfOGp7oZJftdBxR/8CaQxZugYB9WJ2Q7g7hKRBUkwRcCgdDbli+FdZjt0wPkA==
- Authentication-results: dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;dmarc=none action=none header.from=suse.com;
- Cc: Wei Liu <wl@xxxxxxx>, Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>, "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Delivery-date: Thu, 20 Apr 2023 08:55:11 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
On 20.04.2023 10:50, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 19.04.2023 21:56, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> But on to the main thing which caught my eye...
>>
>> The FLUSH in FLUSH_CACHE means the flush infrastructure, not "cache
>> flushing", and FLUSH_WRITEBACK is nonsensical next to this.
>
> I agree; I chose the name simply to avoid further changes, while still
> fitting the naming scheme (i.e. the FLUSH_ prefix). I'm okay to change
> to ...
>
>> All other
>> things we flush have a qualification that makes them clear in context.
>> (other than the assist one which I'm going to time out objections to and
>> revert back to name which made more sense.)
>>
>> At an absolutely minimum, FLUSH_CACHE first needs renaming to
>> FLUSH_CACHE_EVICT and then this new one you're adding needs to be
>> FLUSH_CACHE_WRITEBACK.
>
> ... these, but I don't think they're much better (still primarily
> because of the FLUSH_ prefixes).
Actually - are you going to insist on "first"? There would be less code
churn if first I introduced and used FLUSH_CACHE_WRITEBACK, and only
then renamed the few remaining FLUSH_CACHE to FLUSH_CACHE_EVICT.
Jan
|
