From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Julien Grall Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 5/5] xen: arm: correct terminology for cache flush macros Date: Fri, 07 Feb 2014 13:10:33 +0000 Message-ID: <52F4DB49.3070502@linaro.org> References: <1391775139.2162.88.camel@kazak.uk.xensource.com> <1391775176-30313-5-git-send-email-ian.campbell@citrix.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1391775176-30313-5-git-send-email-ian.campbell@citrix.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Ian Campbell , xen-devel@lists.xen.org Cc: tim@xen.org, stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 07/02/14 12:12, Ian Campbell wrote: > The term "flush" is slightly ambiguous. The correct ARM term for for this > operaton is clean, as opposed to clean+invalidate for which we also now have a > function. > > This is a pure rename, no functional change. > > Signed-off-by: Ian Campbell Acked-by: Julien Grall > --- > This could easily be left for 4.5. It would be nice to have a common nomenclature for the functions (a bit like your TLB patch series). But, if the patch don't go in Xen 4.4, it won't change anything to backporting. The function name is not reused. -- Julien Grall