Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v1 3/3] xen/arm: smmu: Renaming struct iommu_domain *domain to, struct iommu_domain *iommu_domain

["Jaggi, Manish" <Manish.Jaggi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Julien/Ian,
________________________________________
From: Julien Grall <julien.grall.oss@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 5:16 PM
To: Ian Campbell; Julien Grall
Cc: Prasun.kapoor@xxxxxxxxxx; Stefano Stabellini; Jaggi, Manish; Julien Grall; 
Xen Devel; Kumar, Vijaya
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v1 3/3] xen/arm: smmu: Renaming struct 
iommu_domain *domain to, struct iommu_domain *iommu_domain

Hi Ian,

On 14/04/15 12:15, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Mon, 2015-04-06 at 16:15 +0200, Julien Grall wrote:
>> Hi Ian,
>>
>> On 01/04/2015 10:30, Ian Campbell wrote:
>>> On Tue, 2015-03-31 at 17:48 +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
>>>> If it helps we could add a couple of comments on top of the structs in
>>>> smmu.c to explain the meaning of the fields, like:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> /* iommu_domain, not to be confused with a Xen domain */
>>>
>>> I was going to suggest something similar but more expansive, i.e. a
>>> table of them all in one place (i.e. at the top of the file) for ease of
>>> referencing:
>>>
>>> Struct Name            What             Wherefrom     Normally found in
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> iommu_domain           IOMMU Context    Linux         d->arch.blah
>>> arch_smmu_xen_device   Device specific  Xen           device->arch.blurg
>>
>> The actual name of the structure is arm_smmu_xen_device not
>> arch_smmu_xen_device. Did you suggest to rename the name?
>
> No, I was just suggesting someone should create such a table with actual
> current information, instead of made up filler, in it. (you'll notice
> that there is, hopefully, no field blah in d->arch either nor
> device->arch.blurg in the tree either and please don't rename the field
> to match those ;-)).

Thanks for the clarification. I wanted a confirmation because on another
thread [1], Manish said you were suggested a new name.

I think a table describing the different structure would be nice.
[manish] Table is indeed a good option, but I think changing the name of 
arm_smmu_xen_device to something like arch_smmu_device make more sense as 
arm_smmu_xen_device and arm_smmu_device are not differentiable just by name. 

Regards,

[1]
http://lists.xenproject.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2015-04/msg00473.html

--
Julien Grall

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel