On Wed, Jul 27, 2022 at 3:58 AM Hao Peng <flyingpenghao@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> From: Peng Hao <flyingpeng@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> No 'kvmp_mmu_pages', it should be 'kvm_mmu_page'. And
> struct kvm_mmu_pages and struct kvm_mmu_page are different structures,
> here should be kvm_mmu_page.
> kvm_mmu_pages is defined in arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c.
>
> Signed-off-by: Peng Hao <flyingpeng@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 8 ++++----
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> index e8281d64a431..205a9f374e14 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> @@ -1272,8 +1272,8 @@ struct kvm_arch {
> bool tdp_mmu_enabled;
>
> /*
> - * List of struct kvm_mmu_pages being used as roots.
> - * All struct kvm_mmu_pages in the list should have
> + * List of struct kvm_mmu_page being used as roots.
I agree that "struct <name>s" is a bad/misleading way to make a struct
plural in comments. The way I prefer to do it is "<name> structs".
That avoids changing the <name> and still makes it clear it's plural.
So in this case the comment would be:
/*
* List of kvm_mmu_page structs being used as roots.
* All kvm_mmu_page structs in the list should have
* tdp_mmu_page set.
*/
> + * All struct kvm_mmu_page in the list should have
> * tdp_mmu_page set.
> *
> * For reads, this list is protected by:
> @@ -1292,8 +1292,8 @@ struct kvm_arch {
> struct list_head tdp_mmu_roots;
>
> /*
> - * List of struct kvmp_mmu_pages not being used as roots.
> - * All struct kvm_mmu_pages in the list should have
> + * List of struct kvm_mmu_page not being used as roots.
> + * All struct kvm_mmu_page in the list should have
> * tdp_mmu_page set and a tdp_mmu_root_count of 0.
> */
> struct list_head tdp_mmu_pages;
> --
> 2.27.0
