On 19.10.20 03:57, Wei Yang wrote: > On Mon, Oct 12, 2020 at 02:53:15PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote: >> Let's rename accordingly. >> >> Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <m...@redhat.com> >> Cc: Jason Wang <jasow...@redhat.com> >> Cc: Pankaj Gupta <pankaj.gupta.li...@gmail.com> >> Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <da...@redhat.com> >> --- >> drivers/virtio/virtio_mem.c | 29 +++++++++++++++-------------- >> 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/virtio/virtio_mem.c b/drivers/virtio/virtio_mem.c >> index 3a772714fec9..d06c8760b337 100644 >> --- a/drivers/virtio/virtio_mem.c >> +++ b/drivers/virtio/virtio_mem.c >> @@ -589,8 +589,8 @@ static bool virtio_mem_contains_range(struct virtio_mem >> *vm, uint64_t start, >> return start >= vm->addr && start + size <= vm->addr + vm->region_size; >> } >> >> -static int virtio_mem_notify_going_online(struct virtio_mem *vm, >> - unsigned long mb_id) >> +static int virtio_mem_sbm_notify_going_online(struct virtio_mem *vm, >> + unsigned long mb_id) > > Look into this patch with "virtio-mem: Big Block Mode (BBM) memory hotplug" > together, I thought the code is a little "complex". > > The final logic of virtio_mem_memory_notifier_cb() looks like this: > > virtio_mem_memory_notifier_cb() > if (vm->in_sbm) > notify_xxx() > if (vm->in_sbm) > notify_xxx() > > Can we adjust this like > > virtio_mem_memory_notifier_cb() > notify_xxx() > if (vm->in_sbm) > return > notify_xxx() > if (vm->in_sbm) > return > > This style looks a little better to me.
Then we lose all the shared code after any of the mode-specific handling? Like we have in MEM_OFFLINE, MEM_ONLINE, MEM_CANCEL_OFFLINE, ... Don't think this will improve the situation. -- Thanks, David / dhildenb _______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
