On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 04:38:31AM +0000, Tian, Kevin wrote: > > From: Peter Xu [mailto:peterx@xxxxxxxxxx] > > Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2019 12:31 PM > > > > On Tue, Sep 24, 2019 at 09:38:53AM +0800, Lu Baolu wrote: > > > > > intel_mmmap_range(domain, addr, end, phys_addr, prot) > > > > > > > > Maybe think of a different name..? mmmap seems a bit weird :-) > > > > > > Yes. I don't like it either. I've thought about it and haven't > > > figured out a satisfied one. Do you have any suggestions? > > > > How about at least split the word using "_"? Like "mm_map", then > > apply it to all the "mmm*" prefixes. Otherwise it'll be easily > > misread as mmap() which is totally irrelevant to this... > > > > what is the point of keeping 'mm' here? replace it with 'iommu'? I'm not sure of what Baolu thought, but to me "mm" makes sense itself to identify this from real IOMMU page tables (because IIUC these will be MMU page tables). We can come up with better names, but IMHO "iommu" can be a bit misleading to let people refer to the 2nd level page table. Regards, -- Peter Xu
