On 04.07.2025 17:29, Oleksii Kurochko wrote:
>
> On 6/30/25 4:27 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> --- a/xen/arch/riscv/include/asm/smp.h
>>> +++ b/xen/arch/riscv/include/asm/smp.h
>>> @@ -3,6 +3,7 @@
>>> #define ASM__RISCV__SMP_H
>>>
>>> #include <xen/cpumask.h>
>>> +#include <xen/macros.h>
>>> #include <xen/percpu.h>
>>>
>>> #include <asm/current.h>
>>> @@ -18,6 +19,18 @@ static inline unsigned long cpuid_to_hartid(unsigned
>>> long cpuid)
>>> return pcpu_info[cpuid].hart_id;
>>> }
>>>
>>> +static inline unsigned int hartid_to_cpuid(unsigned long hartid)
>>> +{
>>> + for ( unsigned int cpuid = 0; cpuid < ARRAY_SIZE(pcpu_info); cpuid++ )
>> We had been there before, I think: Why "cpuid", not "cpu" (as we have it
>> about
>> everywhere else)?
>
> To be in sync with other already merged functions, f.e.
> set_cpuid_to_hartid(cpuid, hartid).
To be honest, I'd much rather see such uses of "cpuid" (as a variable or
parameter name; it's less of a concern in function names) be changed.
Jan
