On Wed, Jan 8, 2020 at 9:17 AM Logan Gunthorpe <logang@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On 2020-01-08 5:28 a.m., David Hildenbrand wrote: > > On 07.01.20 21:59, Logan Gunthorpe wrote: > >> The mhp_restrictions struct really doesn't specify anything resembling > >> a restriction anymore so rename it to be mhp_modifiers. > > > > I wonder if something like "mhp_params" would be even better. It's > > essentially just a way to avoid changing call chains rough-out all archs > > whenever we want to add a new parameter. > > Sure, that does sound a bit nicer to me. I can change it for v3. Oh, I was just about to chime in to support "modifiers" because I would expect all parameters to folded into a "params" struct. The modifiers seem to be limited to the set of items that are only considered in a non-default / expert memory hotplug use cases.
