On Mon, Mar 06, 2023 at 02:50:20PM -0800, Axel Rasmussen wrote: > The basic problem is, over time we've added new userfaultfd ioctls, and > we've refactored the code so functions which used to handle only one > case are now re-used to deal with several cases. While this happened, we > didn't bother to rename the functions. > > Similarly, as we added new functions, we cargo-culted pieces of the > now-inconsistent naming scheme, so those functions too ended up with > names that don't make a lot of sense. > > A key point here is, "copy" in most userfaultfd code refers specifically > to UFFDIO_COPY, where we allocate a new page and copy its contents from > userspace. There are many functions with "copy" in the name that don't > actually do this (at least in some cases). > > So, rename things into a consistent scheme. The high level idea is that > the call stack for userfaultfd ioctls becomes: > > userfaultfd_ioctl > -> userfaultfd_(particular ioctl) > -> mfill_atomic_(particular kind of fill operation) > -> mfill_atomic /* loops over pages in range */ > -> mfill_atomic_pte /* deals with single pages */ > -> mfill_atomic_pte_(particular kind of fill operation) > -> mfill_atomic_install_pte > > There are of course some special cases (shmem, hugetlb), but this is the > general structure which all function names now adhere to. > > Signed-off-by: Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@xxxxxxxxxx> Acked-by: Peter Xu <peterx@xxxxxxxxxx> -- Peter Xu
