On Wed, May 24, 2023 at 05:00:40AM +0000, Tian, Kevin wrote: > > > > +}; > > > > +#define IOMMU_DEVICE_GET_HW_INFO _IO(IOMMUFD_TYPE, > > > > IOMMUFD_CMD_DEVICE_GET_HW_INFO) > > > > #endif > > > > > > Here we have a naming confusion. > > > > > > 'IOMMU' is the prefix of iommufd ioctls. > > > > > > 'DEVICE' is the subjective. > > > > > > Then "GET_HW_INFO" implies getting hardware info related to > > > this device. then it should not be restricted to the iommu info. > > > > > > with that it's clearer to call it IOMMU_DEVICE_GET_IOMMU_INFO. > > > > Though the entire ioctl is tied to the input "dev_id", I think > > it isn't really about the device corresponding to the dev_id, > > similar to the IOMMU_HWPT_ALLOC having a dev_id input too. So, > > I think the "IOMMU_DEVICE" here should be interpreted simply > > as "an iommu device". We could also highlight this somewhere > > in the header. > > yes this is a good view of it. with that it's not necessary to have > a 'DEVICE' notation in the name which looks confusing with dev_id. > > Just IOMMU_GET_HW_INFO for the iommu behind the specified dev_id. > > then keep the structure name as iommu_hw_info. That'd be neat. > > With that being said, IOMMU_DEVICE_SET/UNSET_DATA should be > > renamed to IOMMU_DEVICE_SET/UNSET_DEV_DATA -- "DEVICE" is the > > iommu device while the "DEV_DATA" is a given device that's > > behind the iommu. > > this then becomes IOMMU_SET/UNSET_DEV_DATA. Ack. Thanks Nic
