Re: [V8 PATCH 5/8] pvh dom0: Add and remove foreign pages

[George Dunlap <george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com>]

On 04/08/2014 03:18 PM, Tim Deegan wrote:
> At 15:07 +0100 on 08 Apr (1396966037), Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>> On 08.04.14 at 16:01, <tim@xen.org> wrote:
>>> At 08:36 +0100 on 08 Apr (1396942615), Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>>>> On 08.04.14 at 03:11, <mukesh.rathor@oracle.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 07 Apr 2014 07:57:56 +0100
>>>>> "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote:
>>>>>> In the end I think we'll want to make them all report proper error
>>>>>> codes...
>>>>>
>>>>> Ok, how about the following patch then? If it's OK, I'd like to submit
>>>>> independently.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, I just now stumbled across this oddity too. Looks generally
>>>> like what we want
>>>
>>> While in general I like this, I'm worried about inverting the sense of
>>> the return code -- that seems like setting a trap for ourselves with
>>> backporting patches past this one.
>>>
>>> I'd be inclined to change the name of the function as a safety catch,
>>> though I can't immediately think of a good new name for set_p2m_entry.
>>> Maybe just truncate it to set_p2m()?
>>
>> That could mean a different thing. How about p2m_set_entry(),
>> at once matching most other P2M functions using p2m_ as their
>> prefix.
>
> Sure.  I think the current implementation in p2m_pt might be using
> that name, but it could be given a more meaningful name at the same
> time.

Ack to the rename.

  -George