linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] KVM: Align the function name of kvm_swap_active

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <Y/ZhYiN+oYbx6z5n@google.com>
Date:   Wed, 22 Feb 2023 10:39:30 -0800
From:   Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
To:     Jun Miao <jun.miao@...el.com>
Cc:     pbonzini@...hat.com, corbet@....net, maciej.szmigiero@...cle.com,
        kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: Align the function name of kvm_swap_active_memslots()

Nit, "Align" is a confusing because it's often used to refer to indentation.  Maybe?

   KVM: Fix comments that refer to the non-existent install_new_memslots()

On Mon, Feb 20, 2023, Jun Miao wrote:
> The function of install_new_memslots() is replaced by kvm_swap_active_memslots().
> In order to avoid confusion, align the name in the comments which always be ignored.
> 
> Fixes: a54d806688fe "KVM: Keep memslots in tree-based structures instead of array-based ones")
> Signed-off-by: Jun Miao <jun.miao@...el.com>
> ---
>  Documentation/virt/kvm/locking.rst | 2 +-
>  include/linux/kvm_host.h           | 4 ++--
>  virt/kvm/kvm_main.c                | 4 ++--
>  3 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/virt/kvm/locking.rst b/Documentation/virt/kvm/locking.rst
> index 14c4e9fa501d..ac0e549a3ae7 100644
> --- a/Documentation/virt/kvm/locking.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/virt/kvm/locking.rst
> @@ -21,7 +21,7 @@ The acquisition orders for mutexes are as follows:
>  - kvm->mn_active_invalidate_count ensures that pairs of
>    invalidate_range_start() and invalidate_range_end() callbacks
>    use the same memslots array.  kvm->slots_lock and kvm->slots_arch_lock
> -  are taken on the waiting side in install_new_memslots, so MMU notifiers
> +  are taken on the waiting side in kvm_swap_active_memslots, so MMU notifiers

Can you send a v2 and opportunistically add () to the blurbs that don't have it?
I.e. so these are all "kvm_swap_active_memslots()"?

Thanks!