> -----Original Message----- > From: Jan Beulich <[email protected]> > Sent: 25 July 2019 11:25 > To: Paul Durrant <[email protected]> > Cc: Roger Pau Monne <[email protected]>; Julien Grall > <[email protected]>; Andrew Cooper > <[email protected]>; George Dunlap <[email protected]>; Ian > Jackson > <[email protected]>; Stefano Stabellini <[email protected]>; > [email protected]; > KonradRzeszutek Wilk <[email protected]>; Tim (Xen.org) <[email protected]>; > Wei Liu <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/6] domain: stash xen_domctl_createdomain > flags in struct domain > > On 25.07.2019 12:11, Paul Durrant wrote: > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Roger Pau Monne <[email protected]> > >> Sent: 25 July 2019 10:23 > >> To: Paul Durrant <[email protected]> > >> Cc: [email protected]; Stefano Stabellini > >> <[email protected]>; Wei Liu > <[email protected]>; > >> Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <[email protected]>; George Dunlap > >> <[email protected]>; Andrew > >> Cooper <[email protected]>; Ian Jackson <[email protected]>; > >> Tim (Xen.org) > <[email protected]>; > >> Julien Grall <[email protected]>; Jan Beulich <[email protected]> > >> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/6] domain: stash xen_domctl_createdomain > >> flags in struct domain > >> > >> On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 05:06:04PM +0100, Paul Durrant wrote: > >>> These are canonical source of data used to set various other flags. If > >>> they are available directly in struct domain then the other flags are no > >>> longer needed. > >>> > >>> This patch simply copies the flags into a new 'createflags' field in > >>> struct domain. Subsequent patches will do the related clean-up work. > >> > >> Thanks! > >> > >> Just one naming comment (which is subject to taste I guess). > >> > >>> diff --git a/xen/include/xen/sched.h b/xen/include/xen/sched.h > >>> index b40c8fd138..edae372c2b 100644 > >>> --- a/xen/include/xen/sched.h > >>> +++ b/xen/include/xen/sched.h > >>> @@ -308,6 +308,7 @@ enum guest_type { > >>> > >>> struct domain > >>> { > >>> + unsigned int createflags; > >> > >> Can you name this just flags or options or some such (without the > >> create prefix). IMO adding the create prefix makes it look like a > >> field only used during domain creation, while it's not the case. > > > > I guess naming it simply 'flags' would be ok coupled with a comment > > in the header stating that the field is merely a copy of the domain > > create flags. Anyone else got opinions on this? > > We use "flags" too often imo. What about "options" as suggested by > Roger, or "settings"?
Alright, let's go with 'options' then. Paul > > Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
