>>> On 10.08.18 at 13:52, <jgr...@suse.com> wrote:
> --- a/arch/x86/hyperv/mmu.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/hyperv/mmu.c
> @@ -228,9 +228,9 @@ void hyperv_setup_mmu_ops(void)
>
> if (!(ms_hyperv.hints & HV_X64_EX_PROCESSOR_MASKS_RECOMMENDED)) {
> pr_info("Using hypercall for remote TLB flush\n");
> - pv_mmu_ops.flush_tlb_others = hyperv_flush_tlb_others;
> + pv_ops.pv_mmu_ops.flush_tlb_others = hyperv_flush_tlb_others;
Taking just this as example, why not
pv_ops.mmu.flush_tlb_others = hyperv_flush_tlb_others;
? Both pv_ and _ops are redundant on the field names.
Jan
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
