On 06/03/2018 12:03, Liu, Yi L wrote: > On Tue, Mar 06, 2018 at 11:18:43AM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >> On 05/03/2018 09:42, Liu, Yi L wrote: >>>> In general I think it's better to change your names from "assigned_dev" >>>> to "sva_dev", because the point of the list is to only iterate over >>>> devices that might be interested in using SVA. >>> >>> For "assigned_dev", my purpose is to distinguish "assigned devices" from >>> emulated devices. Only the SVA usage on "assigned devices" is cared here. >>> But it is true only SVA capable device is interested. So I may need to >>> rename it as "assigned_sva_dev". How about your opinion? >> >> What you care about is not whether the device assigned, but rather >> whether it called or not pci_setup_sva_ops. Currently only VFIO does >> this, but that's not a requirement. Hence my suggestion of calling it >> sva_dev. > > Yes, only VFIO calls pci_setup_sva_ops so far, but it should not limited to. > I'll apply in next version.
For what it's worth, I agree with David's suggestion for naming (so pci_setup_pasid_ops, pasid_dev, etc.) Paolo