Re: [RFC PATCH V2 1/8] xen/mem_event: Cleanup of mem_event structures

[Razvan Cojocaru <rcojocaru@bitdefender.com>]

On 01/22/2015 02:43 PM, Tim Deegan wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> At 16:17 +0100 on 18 Jan (1421594274), Tamas K Lengyel wrote:
>> From: Razvan Cojocaru <rcojocaru@bitdefender.com>
>>
>> The public mem_event structures used to communicate with helper applications via
>> shared rings have been used in different settings. However, the variable names
>> within this structure have not reflected this fact, resulting in the reuse of
>> variables to mean different things under different scenarios.
>>
>> This patch remedies the issue by clearly defining the structure members based on
>> the actual context within which the structure is used.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Razvan Cojocaru <rcojocaru@bitdefender.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Tamas K Lengyel <tamas.lengyel@zentific.com>
> 
> This looks like a nice improvement.  If everyone who commented about
> making ABI changes is happy with it, I am too.
> 
> It would be nice if you could add some comments to the new struct
> definitions saying what the various fields mean (e.g. when the event
> triggers and what the fields will contain).
> 
> One nit in the patch itself:
> 
>> @@ -592,13 +592,12 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
>>                  }
>>  
>>  
>> -                rsp.gfn = req.gfn;
>> -                rsp.p2mt = req.p2mt;
>> +                rsp.mem_access_event.gfn = req.mem_access_event.gfn;
> 
> You're dropping a p2mt update here.  Is that an oversight?

Yes, that's an oversight (unless Tamas knows something about this I don't).


Thanks,
Razvan