From: Paolo Bonzini <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: Linus Torvalds <email@example.com>, Sean Christopherson <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Borislav Petkov <email@example.com>, Xiaoyao Li <firstname.lastname@example.org> Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <email@example.com>, KVM list <firstname.lastname@example.org> Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] First batch of KVM changes for 5.6 merge window Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2020 22:08:10 +0100 [thread overview] Message-ID: <email@example.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <CAHk-=wjZTUq8u0HZUJ1mKZjb-haBFhX+mKcUv3Kdh9LQb8rg4g@mail.gmail.com> On 31/01/20 19:01, Linus Torvalds wrote: > There are other (pre-existing) differences, but while fixing up the > merge conflict I really got the feeling that it's confusing and wrong > to basically use different naming for these things when they are about > the same bit. I was supposed to get a topic branch and fix everything up so that both CPU_BASED_ and VMX_FEATURE_ constants would get the new naming. When Boris alerted me of the conflict and I said "thanks I'll sort it out", he probably interpreted it as me not needing the topic branch anymore. I then forgot to remind him, and here we are. > I don't care much which way it goes (maybe the VMX_FATURE_xyz bits > should be renamed instead of the other way around?) and I wonder what > the official documentation names are? Is there some standard here or > are people just picking names at random? The official documentation names are the ones introduced by the KVM pull request ("Table 24-6. Definitions of Primary Processor-Based VM-Execution Controls"). In fact consistency with the documentation was why we changed them. On the other hand Sean wanted VMX_FEATURE_* to be consistent with CPU_BASED_*, which made sense when he wrote the patch. I'll change the names to match for next week's second batch of KVM changes. Paolo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-01-31 21:08 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2020-01-30 18:20 Paolo Bonzini 2020-01-31 18:01 ` Linus Torvalds 2020-01-31 18:53 ` Sean Christopherson 2020-01-31 19:03 ` Linus Torvalds 2020-01-31 21:08 ` Paolo Bonzini [this message] 2020-01-31 21:24 ` Borislav Petkov 2020-01-31 21:27 ` Paolo Bonzini 2020-01-31 19:35 ` pr-tracker-bot
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 \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --subject='Re: [GIT PULL] First batch of KVM changes for 5.6 merge window' \ /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
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).