From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Razvan Cojocaru <rcojocaru@bitdefender.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH V2 1/8] xen/mem_event: Cleanup of
 mem_event structures
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 14:50:51 +0200
Message-ID: <54C0F22B.9060209@bitdefender.com>
References: <1421594281-27658-1-git-send-email-tamas.lengyel@zentific.com>	<1421594281-27658-2-git-send-email-tamas.lengyel@zentific.com>
	<20150122124322.GA97314@deinos.phlegethon.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
In-Reply-To: <20150122124322.GA97314@deinos.phlegethon.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Tim Deegan <tim@xen.org>, Tamas K Lengyel <tamas.lengyel@zentific.com>
Cc: kevin.tian@intel.com, wei.liu2@citrix.com, ian.campbell@citrix.com, stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com, ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com, eddie.dong@intel.com, xen-devel@lists.xen.org, jbeulich@suse.com, andres@lagarcavilla.org, jun.nakajima@intel.com, rshriram@cs.ubc.ca, keir@xen.org, dgdegra@tycho.nsa.gov, yanghy@cn.fujitsu.com
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

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