Re: [PATCH v8 1/2] xen/vpci: header: status register handler

["Roger Pau Monné" <roger.pau@citrix.com>]

On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 09:40:14AM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 29.11.2023 16:18, Stewart Hildebrand wrote:
> > On 11/29/23 06:03, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> >> On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 02:44:24PM -0500, Stewart Hildebrand wrote:
> >>> @@ -407,26 +445,26 @@ uint32_t vpci_read(pci_sbdf_t sbdf, unsigned int reg, unsigned int size)
> >>>  
> >>>  /*
> >>>   * Perform a maybe partial write to a register.
> >>> - *
> >>> - * Note that this will only work for simple registers, if Xen needs to
> >>> - * trap accesses to rw1c registers (like the status PCI header register)
> >>> - * the logic in vpci_write will have to be expanded in order to correctly
> >>> - * deal with them.
> >>>   */
> >>>  static void vpci_write_helper(const struct pci_dev *pdev,
> >>>                                const struct vpci_register *r, unsigned int size,
> >>>                                unsigned int offset, uint32_t data)
> >>>  {
> >>> +    uint32_t val = 0;
> >>
> >> Nit: might be clearer to name this 'current': it's easy to get
> >> confused whether val or data holds the user-provided input.
> > 
> > The name 'current' shadows an existing global variable/macro. How about current_val?
> 
> Or curval? Or just cur (to not collide with our common use of curr)?

Any would be fine, curval or cur_val are short and clear IMO.  Sorry
for having suggested a wrong name in my previous reply.

Thanks, Roger.