lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Jun]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/2] xen: rename wrong named pfn related variables
Date
On 16.06.21 11:56, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 16.06.2021 09:30, Juergen Gross wrote:
>> --- a/arch/x86/xen/p2m.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/xen/p2m.c
>> @@ -95,8 +95,8 @@ unsigned long *xen_p2m_addr __read_mostly;
>> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(xen_p2m_addr);
>> unsigned long xen_p2m_size __read_mostly;
>> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(xen_p2m_size);
>> -unsigned long xen_max_p2m_pfn __read_mostly;
>> -EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(xen_max_p2m_pfn);
>> +unsigned long xen_p2m_max_size __read_mostly;
>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(xen_p2m_max_size);
>
> Instead of renaming the exported variable (which will break consumers
> anyway), how about dropping the apparently unneeded export at this
> occasion?

Why do you think it isn't needed? It is being referenced via the inline
function __pfn_to_mfn() in arch/x86/include/asm/xen/page.h. And
__pfn_to_mfn() is used via lots of other inline functions and macros.

> Further it looks to me as if xen_p2m_size and this variable
> were actually always kept in sync, so I'd like to put up the question
> of dropping one of the two.

Hmm, should be possible, yes.

>
>> @@ -121,7 +121,7 @@ static pte_t *p2m_identity_pte;
>> * can avoid scanning the whole P2M (which may be sized to account for
>> * hotplugged memory).
>> */
>> -static unsigned long xen_p2m_last_pfn;
>> +static unsigned long xen_p2m_pfn_limit;
>
> As to the comment remark in patch 1: You don't alter the comment
> here either, and "limit" still doesn't make clear whether that's an
> inclusive or exclusive limit.

Oh, indeed. Will fix that.


Juergen
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-keys][unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-06-16 12:44    [W:0.734 / U:0.452 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site