On 10/08/18 14:06, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 10.08.18 at 13:52, <jgross@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> --- a/arch/x86/hyperv/mmu.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/hyperv/mmu.c
>> @@ -228,9 +228,9 @@ void hyperv_setup_mmu_ops(void)
>>
>> if (!(ms_hyperv.hints & HV_X64_EX_PROCESSOR_MASKS_RECOMMENDED)) {
>> pr_info("Using hypercall for remote TLB flush\n");
>> - pv_mmu_ops.flush_tlb_others = hyperv_flush_tlb_others;
>> + pv_ops.pv_mmu_ops.flush_tlb_others = hyperv_flush_tlb_others;
>
> Taking just this as example, why not
>
> pv_ops.mmu.flush_tlb_others = hyperv_flush_tlb_others;
>
> ? Both pv_ and _ops are redundant on the field names.
Good idea.
Juergen
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
