Messages in this thread | | | From | Paul Durrant <> | Date | Wed, 9 Nov 2011 14:56:42 +0000 | Subject | RE: [PATCH 1/3] Introducing grant table V2 stucture |
| |
I'd be happy with 'addr' or 'opaque' or somesuch if 'raw' is distasteful.
Paul
> -----Original Message----- > From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk [mailto:konrad.wilk@oracle.com] > Sent: 09 November 2011 14:49 > To: Paul Durrant > Cc: annie.li@oracle.com; xen-devel@lists.xensource.com; linux- > kernel@vger.kernel.org; jeremy@goop.org; kurt.hackel@oracle.com > Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] Introducing grant table V2 stucture > > On Wed, Nov 09, 2011 at 11:11:22AM +0000, Paul Durrant wrote: > > Annie, > > > > Comments inline below... > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > [snip] > > > -static struct grant_entry *shared; > > > +static union { > > > + struct grant_entry_v1 *v1; > > > + void *ring_addr; > > > +} shared; > > > + > > > > 'ring_addr' seems like the wrong name here; how about 'raw'? > > Or 'ring'. I asked Annie to change it from 'raw' to something else > and the first thing that came in my mind was 'ring_addr'. But this > does not point to a ring, so the 'ring' part is wrong. > > Point here is to make it descriptive. 'raw' does not carry meaning > of _what_ it is suppose to do.
| |