Hi jan > -----Original Message----- > From: Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com> > Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2022 4:33 PM > To: Penny Zheng <penny.zh...@arm.com> > Cc: Wei Chen <wei.c...@arm.com>; Stefano Stabellini > <sstabell...@kernel.org>; Julien Grall <jul...@xen.org>; Bertrand Marquis > <bertrand.marq...@arm.com>; Volodymyr Babchuk > <volodymyr_babc...@epam.com>; Andrew Cooper > <andrew.coop...@citrix.com>; George Dunlap <george.dun...@citrix.com>; > Wei Liu <w...@xen.org>; xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/9] xen/arm: rename PGC_reserved to PGC_staticmem > > On 31.05.2022 05:12, Penny Zheng wrote: > > --- a/xen/common/page_alloc.c > > +++ b/xen/common/page_alloc.c > > @@ -151,8 +151,8 @@ > > #define p2m_pod_offline_or_broken_replace(pg) BUG_ON(pg != NULL) > > #endif > > > > -#ifndef PGC_reserved > > -#define PGC_reserved 0 > > +#ifndef PGC_staticmem > > +#define PGC_staticmem 0 > > #endif > > Just wondering: Is the "mem" part of the name really significant? Pages always > represent memory of some form, don't they? >
Sure, it seems redundant, I'll rename to PGC_static. > Jan
