[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4ECA0E87.4070909@oss.ntt.co.jp>
Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2011 17:40:39 +0900
From: Takuya Yoshikawa <yoshikawa.takuya@....ntt.co.jp>
To: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
CC: Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, KVM <kvm@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/6] KVM: introduce kvm_for_each_memslot macro
(2011/11/21 17:34), Avi Kivity wrote:
>> Do you have any preference for the arguments ordering?
>>
>> I think placing the target one, memslot in this case, first is
>> conventional in
>> the kernel code, except when we want to place "kvm" or something like
>> that.
>>
>> But in kvm code, there seems to be some difference.
>
> You mean for the macro? Yes, making memslot the first argument is a
> good idea. Any difference in kvm code is not intentional.
>
Yes.
Xiao, please change the order if you have no problem.
Thanks,
Takuya
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists