From: Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev>
To: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>
Cc: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>, James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@arm.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Fuad Tabba <tabba@google.com>,
Vincent Donnefort <vdonnefort@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] KVM: arm64: Redefine pKVM memory transitions in terms of source/target
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2022 10:23:36 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y1utqG5f0lRrNwlI@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Y1uncNq2oyc5wALG@google.com>
Quentin,
On Fri, Oct 28, 2022 at 09:57:04AM +0000, Quentin Perret wrote:
> Hey Oliver,
>
> On Friday 28 Oct 2022 at 08:34:48 (+0000), Oliver Upton wrote:
> > Perhaps it is just me, but the 'initiator' and 'completer' terms are
> > slightly confusing descriptors for the addresses involved in a memory
> > transition. Apply a rename to instead describe memory transitions in
> > terms of a source and target address.
>
> Just to provide some rationale for the initiator/completer terminology,
> the very first implementation we did of this used 'sender/recipient (or
> something along those lines I think), and we ended up confusing
> ourselves massively. The main issue is that memory doesn't necessarily
> 'flow' in the same direction as the transition. It's all fine for a
> donation or a share, but reclaim and unshare become funny. 'The
> recipient of an unshare' can be easily misunderstood, I think.
>
> So yeah, we ended up with initiator/completer, which may not be the
> prettiest terminology, but it was useful to disambiguate things at
> least.
I see, thanks for the background :) If I've managed to re-ambiguate the
language here then LMK. Frankly, I'm more strongly motivated on the
first patch anyway.
--
Thanks,
Oliver
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-10-28 10:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-10-28 8:34 [PATCH 0/2] KVM: arm64: pKVM memory transitions cleanup Oliver Upton
2022-10-28 8:34 ` [PATCH 1/2] KVM: arm64: Clean out the odd handling of completer_addr Oliver Upton
2022-11-10 10:42 ` Will Deacon
2022-10-28 8:34 ` [PATCH 2/2] KVM: arm64: Redefine pKVM memory transitions in terms of source/target Oliver Upton
2022-10-28 9:57 ` Quentin Perret
2022-10-28 10:23 ` Oliver Upton [this message]
2022-11-10 10:46 ` Will Deacon
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=Y1utqG5f0lRrNwlI@google.com \
--to=oliver.upton@linux.dev \
--cc=alexandru.elisei@arm.com \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=qperret@google.com \
--cc=tabba@google.com \
--cc=vdonnefort@google.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).