On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 12:17:17PM -0300, Rafael Aquini wrote: > On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 07:57:55PM -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > > > +#if defined(CONFIG_VIRTIO_BALLOON) || defined(CONFIG_VIRTIO_BALLOON_MODULE) .. snip.. > > > +struct address_space *balloon_mapping; > > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(balloon_mapping); > > > > Why don't you call this kvm_balloon_mapping - and when other balloon > > drivers use it, then change it to something more generic. Also at that > > future point the other balloon drivers might do it a bit differently so > > it might be that will be reworked completly. > > Ok, I see your point. However I really think it's better to keep the naming as > generic as possible today and, in the future, those who need to change it a bit can > do it with no pain at all. I believe this way we potentially prevent unnecessary code > duplication, as it will just be a matter of adjusting those preprocessor checking to > include other balloon driver to the scheme, or get rid of all of them (in case all > balloon drivers assume the very same technique for their page mobility primitives). Either way, if a driver is going to use this, they would need to adjust the preprocessor checking (as you pointed out) to include: #ifdef CONFIG_HYPERVISORX_BALLOON in this file. At which point they might as well rename the exported symbol to be more generic - and do whatever else they need to do (add extra stuff maybe?). > > As I can be utterly wrong on this, lets see if other folks raise the same > concerns about this naming scheme I'm using here. If it ends up being a general > concern that it would be better not being generic at this point, I'll happily > switch my approach to whatever comes up to be the most feasible way of doing it. My point here is that its more of name-space pollution. I've gotten flak on doing this with drivers - which had very generic sounding names, and it made more sense to rename them with a proper prefix. You are adding pieces of code for the benefit of one driver. But that (getting flak on the namespace) might be because the mailing list where I had posted had more aggressive reviewers and this one is composed of more mellow folks who are OK with this. Andrew is the final man - and I am not sure what he prefers. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>