On Sat, Jun 8, 2024 at 12:12 AM Edgecombe, Rick P <rick.p.edgecombe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, 2024-06-07 at 10:56 +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > Subject: propagate enum kvm_process to MMU notifier callbacks > > > > But again, the naming... I don't like kvm_process - in an OS process > > is a word with a clear meaning. Yes, that is a noun and this is a > > verb, but then naming an enum with a verb is also awkward. > > > > Perhaps kvm_gfn_range_filter and range->attr_filter? A bit wordy but very > > clear: > > > > enum kvm_tdp_mmu_root_types types = > > kvm_gfn_range_filter_to_root_types(kvm, range->attr_filter) > > > > I think I like it. > > Agree 'process' sticks out. Somehow having attr_filter and args.attributes in > the same struct feels a bit wrong. Not that process was a lot better. > > I guess attr_filter is more about alias ranges, and args.attribute is more about > conversion to various types of memory (private, shared and ideas of other types > I guess). But since today we only have private and shared, I wonder if there is > some way to combine them within struct kvm_gfn_range? I've not thought this all > the way through. I think it's better that they stay separate. One is an argument (args.attribute), the other is not, it should be clear enough. Paolo
