>>> On 28.03.17 at 23:11, <andrew.coop...@citrix.com> wrote:
> On 27/03/2017 10:10, Wei Liu wrote:
>> Prefix them with "mm_" and add declarations to asm-x86/mm.h.
>>
>> They will be needed when we split PV specific code out of x86/mm.c.
Is that actually the case? They're about PV (target) domains, so
I'd kind of expect them to move together with the PV-only code,
even if the caller may not be PV.
>> No functional change.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Wei Liu <wei.l...@citrix.com>
>
> I have to admit that I don't understand why they are called
> {get,put}_pg_owner. Perhaps very historical from Linux?
I don't think any of this code has Linux origin.
> They are nothing to do with pages, and get a reference on the domain.
Depends on the perspective you take: For all of their callers,
they have precisely that meaning.
> I'd recommend s/pg_owner/domain/ so the function calls actually indicate
> what object is having the reference taken on it.
Well, to make clear what uses are legitimate, perhaps
s/pg_owner/foreign_domain/ (if you really continue to think
these should be renamed in the first place)? Using just "domain"
pretty clearly results in too generic names. Perhaps additionally
they should be prefixed mm_?
Jan
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
