On 14/06/2016 18:46, yunhong jiang wrote: > On Tue, 14 Jun 2016 15:41:07 +0200 > Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> >> >> On 14/06/2016 15:23, Roman Kagan wrote: >>>>> >>>>> +static int cpu_preemption_timer_multi; >>>>> +static bool __read_mostly enable_hv_timer; >>>>> +module_param_named(enable_hv_timer, enable_hv_timer, bool, >>>>> S_IRUGO); + >>> Non-techincal issue: I think the naming for the parameter is >>> unfortunate, as it looks similar to a number of CPU properties in >>> QEMU that start with "hv-", which are all related to MS Hyper-V >>> compatibility features. >> >> Non-technical but important. Let's change it to preemption_timer (and >> the variable to enable_preemption_timer). >> >> The code can keep the "hv_timer" moniker though. > > Hi, Paolo, should I resend the patch for this change? No, no need to. I've already pushed the patches to kvm/queue. I've also separated all vmx bits to one patch and x86 to another. Paolo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
