[Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH 13/13] Nested Virtualiztion: hap-on-hap

[Tim Deegan <Tim.Deegan@xxxxxxxxxx>]

At 02:37 +0100 on 10 Sep (1284086227), Dong, Eddie wrote:
> wording is always a challenge in nested virtualization :(
> 
> I have similar feeling and thinking. In all the explaination text, we
> use the term l1 guest, l2 guest which makes everybody easy to
> understand, but in the code we are avoiding those clear prefix both
> here and in Qing's patch. How about we use l1/l2 prefix more to
> explicitly differentiate among them? Just 2 cents, it may be too
> later.

That sounds like a good idea.  My only reservation is that it might be
confusing since we already use l1 and l2 when naming levels of
pagetables, so e.g. the shadow code has variables called l2gfn.

Maybe we could use n0, n1, n2 for nesting levels instead?

Cheers,

Tim.

-- 
Tim Deegan <Tim.Deegan@xxxxxxxxxx>
Principal Software Engineer, XenServer Engineering
Citrix Systems UK Ltd.  (Company #02937203, SL9 0BG)

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel