On Tue, Nov 18, 2025 at 03:44:01PM -0400, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 13, 2025 at 04:05:09PM -0800, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> > > -struct iopt_pages *iopt_alloc_file_pages(struct file *file, unsigned 
> > > long start,
> > > +struct iopt_pages *iopt_alloc_file_pages(struct file *file,
> > > +                                  unsigned long start_byte,
> > > +                                  unsigned long start,
> > >                                    unsigned long length, bool writable);
> > 
> > Passing in start_byte looks like a cleanup to me, aligning with
> > what iopt_map_common() has.
> 
> > Since we are doing this cleanup, maybe we could follow the same
> > sequence: xxx, start, length, start_byte, writable?
> 
> ??
> 
> static int iopt_map_common(struct iommufd_ctx *ictx, struct io_pagetable 
> *iopt,
>                          struct iopt_pages *pages, unsigned long *iova,
>                          unsigned long length, unsigned long start_byte,
>                          int iommu_prot, unsigned int flags)
> 
> Not the same arguments, we don't pass start and start_byte there?

I found that iopt_map_common() has a "start_byte" following the
"length". So, wondering if it'd be cleaner to do the same.

But, yes, they are slightly different. Let's keep it as-is then.

Thanks
Nicolin

Reply via email to