On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 09:31:47AM +0100, Paul Durrant wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Roger Pau Monne > > Sent: 27 March 2017 16:35 > > To: xen-de...@lists.xenproject.org > > Cc: Roger Pau Monne <roger....@citrix.com>; Jan Beulich > > <jbeul...@suse.com>; Andrew Cooper <andrew.coop...@citrix.com>; Paul > > Durrant <paul.durr...@citrix.com> > > Subject: [PATCH 1/2] x86/io: rename misleading dpci_ prefixed functions to > > hvm_ > > > > The dpci_ prefix used on those IO handlers is misleading, there's nothing > > PCI > > specific in them, they simply map a guest IO port into a machine (physical) > > IO > > port. They don't specifically trap the PCI IO port range in any way > > (0xcf8/0xcfc). > > > > Rename them to use the hvm_ prefix in order to avoid this confusion. > > Actually, I wonder whether a prefix of 'g2m' would be better since 'hvm' > sounds pretty generic.
Yes, I've also been wandering whether to use "direct_", but g2m sounds better. Thanks, Roger. _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
