>>> On 10.08.18 at 13:52, <jgr...@suse.com> wrote: > --- a/arch/x86/hyperv/mmu.c > +++ b/arch/x86/hyperv/mmu.c > @@ -228,9 +228,9 @@ void hyperv_setup_mmu_ops(void) > > if (!(ms_hyperv.hints & HV_X64_EX_PROCESSOR_MASKS_RECOMMENDED)) { > pr_info("Using hypercall for remote TLB flush\n"); > - pv_mmu_ops.flush_tlb_others = hyperv_flush_tlb_others; > + pv_ops.pv_mmu_ops.flush_tlb_others = hyperv_flush_tlb_others;
Taking just this as example, why not pv_ops.mmu.flush_tlb_others = hyperv_flush_tlb_others; ? Both pv_ and _ops are redundant on the field names. Jan _______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization