Quentin, On Fri, Oct 28, 2022 at 09:57:04AM +0000, Quentin Perret wrote: > Hey Oliver, > > On Friday 28 Oct 2022 at 08:34:48 (+0000), Oliver Upton wrote: > > Perhaps it is just me, but the 'initiator' and 'completer' terms are > > slightly confusing descriptors for the addresses involved in a memory > > transition. Apply a rename to instead describe memory transitions in > > terms of a source and target address. > > Just to provide some rationale for the initiator/completer terminology, > the very first implementation we did of this used 'sender/recipient (or > something along those lines I think), and we ended up confusing > ourselves massively. The main issue is that memory doesn't necessarily > 'flow' in the same direction as the transition. It's all fine for a > donation or a share, but reclaim and unshare become funny. 'The > recipient of an unshare' can be easily misunderstood, I think. > > So yeah, we ended up with initiator/completer, which may not be the > prettiest terminology, but it was useful to disambiguate things at > least. I see, thanks for the background :) If I've managed to re-ambiguate the language here then LMK. Frankly, I'm more strongly motivated on the first patch anyway. -- Thanks, Oliver _______________________________________________ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
