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=-9.7 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,UNPARSEABLE_RELAY autolearn=ham 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 74AA4C433DF for ; Mon, 19 Oct 2020 01:57:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D76E622257 for ; Mon, 19 Oct 2020 01:57:33 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org D76E622257 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.alibaba.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 2A01E6B005D; Sun, 18 Oct 2020 21:57:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 22A536B0062; Sun, 18 Oct 2020 21:57:33 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 116F16B0068; Sun, 18 Oct 2020 21:57:33 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0029.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.29]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D50966B005D for ; Sun, 18 Oct 2020 21:57:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin19.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay05.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B7E8181AEF10 for ; Mon, 19 Oct 2020 01:57:32 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 77387013144.19.box67_200f39427233 Received: from filter.hostedemail.com (10.5.16.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.16.251]) by smtpin19.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F7BD1AD1B5 for ; Mon, 19 Oct 2020 01:57:32 +0000 (UTC) X-HE-Tag: box67_200f39427233 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 3102 Received: from out30-130.freemail.mail.aliyun.com (out30-130.freemail.mail.aliyun.com [115.124.30.130]) by imf23.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Mon, 19 Oct 2020 01:57:30 +0000 (UTC) X-Alimail-AntiSpam:AC=PASS;BC=-1|-1;BR=01201311R941e4;CH=green;DM=||false|;DS=||;FP=0|-1|-1|-1|0|-1|-1|-1;HT=e01e04357;MF=richard.weiyang@linux.alibaba.com;NM=1;PH=DS;RN=8;SR=0;TI=SMTPD_---0UCPIkpE_1603072645; Received: from localhost(mailfrom:richard.weiyang@linux.alibaba.com fp:SMTPD_---0UCPIkpE_1603072645) by smtp.aliyun-inc.com(127.0.0.1); Mon, 19 Oct 2020 09:57:25 +0800 Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 09:57:24 +0800 From: Wei Yang To: David Hildenbrand Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, Andrew Morton , "Michael S . Tsirkin" , Jason Wang , Pankaj Gupta Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 21/29] virtio-mem: memory notifier callbacks are specific to Sub Block Mode (SBM) Message-ID: <20201019015724.GA54484@L-31X9LVDL-1304.local> Reply-To: Wei Yang References: <20201012125323.17509-1-david@redhat.com> <20201012125323.17509-22-david@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20201012125323.17509-22-david@redhat.com> X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Mon, Oct 12, 2020 at 02:53:15PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote: >Let's rename accordingly. > >Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" >Cc: Jason Wang >Cc: Pankaj Gupta >Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand >--- > drivers/virtio/virtio_mem.c | 29 +++++++++++++++-------------- > 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) > >diff --git a/drivers/virtio/virtio_mem.c b/drivers/virtio/virtio_mem.c >index 3a772714fec9..d06c8760b337 100644 >--- a/drivers/virtio/virtio_mem.c >+++ b/drivers/virtio/virtio_mem.c >@@ -589,8 +589,8 @@ static bool virtio_mem_contains_range(struct virtio_mem *vm, uint64_t start, > return start >= vm->addr && start + size <= vm->addr + vm->region_size; > } > >-static int virtio_mem_notify_going_online(struct virtio_mem *vm, >- unsigned long mb_id) >+static int virtio_mem_sbm_notify_going_online(struct virtio_mem *vm, >+ unsigned long mb_id) Look into this patch with "virtio-mem: Big Block Mode (BBM) memory hotplug" together, I thought the code is a little "complex". The final logic of virtio_mem_memory_notifier_cb() looks like this: virtio_mem_memory_notifier_cb() if (vm->in_sbm) notify_xxx() if (vm->in_sbm) notify_xxx() Can we adjust this like virtio_mem_memory_notifier_cb() notify_xxx() if (vm->in_sbm) return notify_xxx() if (vm->in_sbm) return This style looks a little better to me. -- Wei Yang Help you, Help me