From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5856C2D0EB for ; Mon, 30 Mar 2020 18:47:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F56420714 for ; Mon, 30 Mar 2020 18:47:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727302AbgC3Sr1 (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Mar 2020 14:47:27 -0400 Received: from mga18.intel.com ([134.134.136.126]:18138 "EHLO mga18.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726385AbgC3Sr1 (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Mar 2020 14:47:27 -0400 IronPort-SDR: qGY1OdV7FU9paGotflJTMqwdFSk84g9mtKI0s2B11t94iVbaxXpSvHwUMNeinQINVWZ8xnQ+g/ WwEC4+HHjEpA== X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga004.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.38]) by orsmga106.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 30 Mar 2020 11:47:26 -0700 IronPort-SDR: 0Z2oSJtqJrNNiTkIQfCPafvTts0FQ3C+G5PgCK1dvDyfYmwvnEDLVJeoTPzJjKzECCMUTGo33b AAwIBN9OO4Bw== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.72,325,1580803200"; d="scan'208";a="395221248" Received: from sjchrist-coffee.jf.intel.com (HELO linux.intel.com) ([10.54.74.202]) by orsmga004.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 30 Mar 2020 11:47:26 -0700 Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2020 11:47:26 -0700 From: Sean Christopherson To: Paolo Bonzini Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, Junaid Shahid , Vitaly Kuznetsov Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] KVM: x86: introduce kvm_mmu_invalidate_gva Message-ID: <20200330184726.GJ24988@linux.intel.com> References: <20200326093516.24215-1-pbonzini@redhat.com> <20200326093516.24215-2-pbonzini@redhat.com> <20200328182631.GQ8104@linux.intel.com> <2a1f9477-c289-592e-25ff-f22a37044457@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <2a1f9477-c289-592e-25ff-f22a37044457@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 12:45:34PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > On 28/03/20 19:26, Sean Christopherson wrote: > >> + if (mmu != &vcpu->arch.guest_mmu) { > > Doesn't need to be addressed here, but this is not the first time in this > > series (the large TLB flushing series) that I've struggled to parse > > "guest_mmu". Would it make sense to rename it something like nested_tdp_mmu > > or l2_tdp_mmu? > > > > A bit ugly, but it'd be nice to avoid the mental challenge of remembering > > that guest_mmu is in play if and only if nested TDP is enabled. > > No, it's not ugly at all. My vote would be for shadow_tdp_mmu. Works for me. My vote is for anything other than guest_mmu :-)