From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pdx-out-007.esa.us-west-2.outbound.mail-perimeter.amazon.com (pdx-out-007.esa.us-west-2.outbound.mail-perimeter.amazon.com [52.34.181.151]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46B63346FA0 for ; Thu, 12 Mar 2026 14:34:37 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=52.34.181.151 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1773326078; cv=none; b=n6f9qqRZlCKUkt99MAQRmE7szjH0z7mp8L7xIIuVhgzMtCF9xxZV3Ru5DGGfv9ZldkmthnxU3ySvs0tnbRMKg+6W6hFPbCKRPeivWzzWzCFsFBaWT/hXH1Vqo3Rk16kIEjh9EAvPUPnuIbwflmow2z3+G+QQE6gt8XsS8letsG0= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1773326078; c=relaxed/simple; bh=mfxrKCupRHu+X+x0cz1Ztl2xdE4Ck9Ir8Gja9HgDHpQ=; h=From:To:CC:Subject:Date:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=RYvwc7oABCH1MDYMCdrFWjsXExi5QIkTlmosF3XzOnBIzFtQVFCecZTYKV7Qph8fGFVb/scOS724iUFeOD4B8EvRmRCA9TVONjbN2gv6djqxK4PfDqjoIt749IQGLsw+BZZopZa6I2JFCC2LnsczYF5+F3aLZ7dBRa3Num6HTXo= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=amazon.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=amazon.co.uk; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=amazon.com header.i=@amazon.com header.b=K8JXgAyt; arc=none smtp.client-ip=52.34.181.151 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=amazon.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=amazon.co.uk Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=amazon.com header.i=@amazon.com header.b="K8JXgAyt" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=amazon.com; i=@amazon.com; q=dns/txt; s=amazoncorp2; t=1773326077; x=1804862077; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to: references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=dHgIOldCEHrIq/D7KhUwWFDHZzGA+7EQcTvE7prH4rA=; b=K8JXgAytmRVslWWRhNJ2X3d5EmfrJ6xZeOrItrEjzYyKSohsF/v23VHG iUtJgkEZ/yfmROnumhD71A7uc9FVkpQX7k3oDKEpjyDYDZbMJjC8uAhZv tOLS70O5+koL+or5lY5QqNajGA1jBMSMkNby/AmiZft+OuvJv0nPxEjeZ +M/YJHDn3ij/25OzJxpr8I+WCwUgI3tFA1pqy8MPjB3UrveaVXD7T5YN2 JROwpTmE5YjnJ5bM6BVFofFlzZZAnDki2KiEXk9DtI8PklgOVdMdCqqqY O2NA9W8vDSvY9rrToWfG7lnK6YgEB/mGNN9DNytIjtHdNdF+9kCduumNK g==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: zGRivClASLi8pX7C5WwfOA== X-CSE-MsgGUID: NWXjBb5ORW6SEN0qZ4AwpA== X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.23,116,1770595200"; d="scan'208";a="14885265" Received: from ip-10-5-9-48.us-west-2.compute.internal (HELO smtpout.naws.us-west-2.prod.farcaster.email.amazon.dev) ([10.5.9.48]) by internal-pdx-out-007.esa.us-west-2.outbound.mail-perimeter.amazon.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 12 Mar 2026 14:34:33 +0000 Received: from EX19MTAUWB002.ant.amazon.com [205.251.233.48:14916] by smtpin.naws.us-west-2.prod.farcaster.email.amazon.dev [10.0.34.39:2525] with esmtp (Farcaster) id b00e6002-be4c-4c7d-8ac7-46a44bd68b48; Thu, 12 Mar 2026 14:34:33 +0000 (UTC) X-Farcaster-Flow-ID: b00e6002-be4c-4c7d-8ac7-46a44bd68b48 Received: from EX19D001UWA001.ant.amazon.com (10.13.138.214) by EX19MTAUWB002.ant.amazon.com (10.250.64.231) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA) id 15.2.2562.37; Thu, 12 Mar 2026 14:34:33 +0000 Received: from dev-dsk-itazur-1b-11e7fc0f.eu-west-1.amazon.com (172.19.66.53) by EX19D001UWA001.ant.amazon.com (10.13.138.214) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA) id 15.2.2562.37; Thu, 12 Mar 2026 14:34:30 +0000 From: Takahiro Itazuri To: CC: , , , , , , , , , , , Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 5/6] KVM: Rename mn_* invalidate-related fields to generic ones Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2026 14:33:59 +0000 Message-ID: <20260312143427.21678-1-itazur@amazon.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.47.3 In-Reply-To: References: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: kvm@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain X-ClientProxiedBy: EX19D039UWB004.ant.amazon.com (10.13.138.57) To EX19D001UWA001.ant.amazon.com (10.13.138.214) On Wed, 11 Mar 2026 13:57:30 -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote: > On Tue, Mar 10, 2026, Takahiro Itazuri wrote: > > The addition of guest_memfd support to pfncaches introduces additional > > sources of pfncache invalidation beyond the MMU notifier path. The > > existing mn_* naming implies that they are only relevant to MMU > > notifiers, which is no longer true. >=20 > I very strongly disagree. Except for kvm_swap_active_memslots() and > kvm_create_vm(), literally every function here has mmu_notifier in its na= me. >=20 > They no longer are used only the for the _kernel's_ MMU-notifier implemen= tation, > but they're still very much scoped explicitly to KVM's overarching MMU no= tification > system. > > If we want to come up with a "better" name, then it needs to capture that= somewhere > in the prefix. Because e.g. invalidate_lock is way, way too generic. I = read that > and my very first question is "ivalidate what, exactly?". Ditto for > memslots_update_rcuwait and pretty much every other field. That makes sense to me. I only had the kernel's MMU notifier in mind at that time, which is why I thought this renaming would be appropriate. Since I'm not particularly seeking a better name, I'll leave these as they are.