Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 19 Dec 2011 11:25:06 +0900 | From | Takuya Yoshikawa <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/8] KVM: MMU: combine unsync and unsync_children |
| |
About naming issues in the kvm mmu code.
Not restricted to your patch series, so please take as a suggestion for the future.
(2011/12/16 19:13), Xiao Guangrong wrote: > +static bool sp_is_unsync(struct kvm_mmu_page *sp) > +{ > + return sp->role.level == PT_PAGE_TABLE_LEVEL&& sp->unsync; > +}
is_unsync_sp() is more consistent with others? e.g. is_large_pte(), is_writable_pte(), is_last_spte()
Takuya
> + > +static unsigned int sp_unsync_children_num(struct kvm_mmu_page *sp) > +{ > + unsigned int num = 0; > + > + if (sp->role.level != PT_PAGE_TABLE_LEVEL) > + num = sp->unsync_children; > + > + return num; > +} > +
| |