On Wed, Jul 27, 2022, David Matlack wrote:
> 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.
+1, I like that approach. FWIW, "struct kvm_mmu_pages" will likely be renamed in
the not-too-distant future[*], but I think it's still worth changing this to follow
David's suggestion.
[*] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220605064342.309219-13-jiangshanlai@xxxxxxxxx
