On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 04:15:32PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote: > On 09/15/2012 11:25 PM, Marcelo Tosatti wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 05:59:06PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote: > >> Wrap the common operations into these two functions > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Why? I think people are used to > > > > spin_lock(lock) > > sequence > > spin_unlock(lock) > > Marcelo, > > There are many functions use this style that wrap the lock into the > _start and _end functions in kernel (eg.: cgroup_pidlist_start and > cgroup_pidlist_stop in kernel/cgroup.c). > > Actually, i just wanted to remove below duplicate ugly code: > > if (!is_error_pfn(pfn)) > kvm_release_pfn_clean(pfn); > > > > > So its easy to verify whether access to data structures are protected. > > > > Unrelated to this patch, one opportunity i see to simplify this > > code is: > > > > - error pfn / mmio pfn / invalid pfn relation > > > > Have the meaning of this bits unified in a single function/helper, see > > comment to patch 1 (perhaps you can further improve). > > Sorry, more detail? Should force the reader of the code to understand error pfn / mmio pfn / invalid pfn in a single helper. That is, avoid using error pfn at all. > > -- > 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 -- 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
