On Fri, May 23, 2025 at 07:53:37AM +0000, Tian, Kevin wrote: > > From: Nicolin Chen <[email protected]> > > Sent: Sunday, May 18, 2025 11:21 AM > > > > @@ -48,6 +48,7 @@ struct iopt_area { > > int iommu_prot; > > bool prevent_access : 1; > > unsigned int num_accesses; > > + unsigned int num_owners; > > What about 'num_locked' to directly mark out that this area > is locked hence cannot be removed?
Yea. That sounds more straightforward to me. I will keep it plural "num_locks". And "is_owner" can be just "locks_area". Thanks Nicolin
