From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754909Ab1LGKuv (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Dec 2011 05:50:51 -0500 Received: from acsinet15.oracle.com ([141.146.126.227]:43438 "EHLO acsinet15.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754181Ab1LGKuu (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Dec 2011 05:50:50 -0500 Message-ID: <4EDF44F8.8060206@oracle.com> Date: Wed, 07 Dec 2011 18:50:32 +0800 From: ANNIE LI Organization: Oracle Corporation User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.23) Gecko/20110920 Thunderbird/3.1.15 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ian Campbell CC: Paul Durrant , "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "konrad.wilk@oracle.com" , "jeremy@goop.org" , "kurt.hackel@oracle.com" Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] xen/granttable: Support sub-page grants References: <4EDDF41E.8070200@oracle.com> <1323168999-4434-1-git-send-email-annie.li@oracle.com> <1323171726.23681.65.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com> <4EDEDF2E.3040204@oracle.com> <291EDFCB1E9E224A99088639C4762022B5988E542E@LONPMAILBOX01.citrite.net> <1323251849.23681.128.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com> <4EDF3F9B.4030407@oracle.com> <1323254036.23681.142.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com> In-Reply-To: <1323254036.23681.142.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Source-IP: ucsinet22.oracle.com [156.151.31.94] X-CT-RefId: str=0001.0A090209.4EDF4505.00E6,ss=1,re=0.000,fgs=0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > The existing convention seems to be for _ref to be a suffix, although > it's only actually used on the end_*_ref ones. > + int (*end_foreign_access_ref)(grant_ref_t, int); > + unsigned long (*end_foreign_transfer_ref)(grant_ref_t); > > Also it occurs to me that access_* sounds like something which uses a > ref rather than something which sets one up. The existing hook to setup > a normal grant is called "update_entry". Perhaps > update_{subpage,transitive}_entry? Yes, you are right. Just like the existing code: gnttab_grant_foreign_access VS gnttab_grant_foreign_access_subpage update_entry in gnttab_grant_foreign_access_ref VS update_{subpage,transitive}_entry in gnttab_grant_foreign_access_{subpage,trans}_ref Thanks Annie