On 16.06.2021 09:30, Juergen Gross wrote:
--- a/arch/x86/xen/p2m.c
+++ b/arch/x86/xen/p2m.c
@@ -95,8 +95,8 @@ unsigned long *xen_p2m_addr __read_mostly;
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(xen_p2m_addr);
unsigned long xen_p2m_size __read_mostly;
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(xen_p2m_size);
-unsigned long xen_max_p2m_pfn __read_mostly;
-EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(xen_max_p2m_pfn);
+unsigned long xen_p2m_max_size __read_mostly;
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(xen_p2m_max_size);
Instead of renaming the exported variable (which will break consumers
anyway), how about dropping the apparently unneeded export at this
occasion?
Further it looks to me as if xen_p2m_size and this variable
were actually always kept in sync, so I'd like to put up the question
of dropping one of the two.
@@ -121,7 +121,7 @@ static pte_t *p2m_identity_pte;
* can avoid scanning the whole P2M (which may be sized to account for
* hotplugged memory).
*/
-static unsigned long xen_p2m_last_pfn;
+static unsigned long xen_p2m_pfn_limit;
As to the comment remark in patch 1: You don't alter the comment
here either, and "limit" still doesn't make clear whether that's an
inclusive or exclusive limit.
Attachment:
OpenPGP_0xB0DE9DD628BF132F.asc
Description: OpenPGP public key
Attachment:
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature