On Wed, Jun 05, 2013 at 07:53:05AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote: > "Michael S. Tsirkin" <m...@redhat.com> writes: > > > On Wed, Jun 05, 2013 at 11:50:52AM +0200, Andreas Färber wrote: > >> Am 04.06.2013 20:51, schrieb Paolo Bonzini: > >> > This series changes all PCI devices (the sole to support hotplug > >> > _and_ use MemoryRegions) to do memory_region_del_subregion at > >> > unrealize time, and memory_region_destroy at instance_finalize > >> > time. > >> > >> The general idea looks good. > >> > >> Could you please follow-up with a patch that switches from exit to > >> unrealize? > > > > What do you guys think about changing the name to something > > else e.g. "free" or "destroy"? > > exit/unrealize != free/destroy. > > You don't actually free anything. See 00/39 in this series for a > precise description.
That's where I got this. It says: "instance_finalize will reclaim the memory" > > http://dictionary.cambridge.org/spellcheck/american-english/?q=unrealize > > English is a fluid language. I wouldn't worry too much about that. > > Regards, > > Anthony Liguori Well I am not worried about English at all. I'm just confused by the function naming, and I think it can be improved. Can we have names actually say what a function is doing? There's no need to use ambiguous terms and then document what they mean. > > I can do it easily if people agree. > > > >> use BUS(), PCI_DEVICE() etc. to hide this. > >> > >> Andreas > >> > >> -- > >> SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany > >> GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer; HRB 16746 AG Nürnberg