Hi, On 05/03/18 16:03, Andre Przywara wrote:
gic_event_needs_delivery() is not named very intuitively, especially the gic_ prefix is somewhat misleading. Rename it to vgic_pending_irq(), which makes it clear that this relates to the virtual GIC and is about interrupts.Signed-off-by: Andre Przywara <andre.przyw...@linaro.org> --- Changelog RFC ... v1: - new patch xen/arch/arm/gic-vgic.c | 2 +- xen/include/asm-arm/event.h | 2 +- xen/include/asm-arm/gic.h | 2 +- 3 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/gic-vgic.c b/xen/arch/arm/gic-vgic.c index c0fe38fd37..60c6c463e9 100644 --- a/xen/arch/arm/gic-vgic.c +++ b/xen/arch/arm/gic-vgic.c @@ -339,7 +339,7 @@ void gic_clear_pending_irqs(struct vcpu *v) gic_remove_from_lr_pending(v, p); }-int gic_events_need_delivery(void)+int vgic_pending_irq(void) { struct vcpu *v = current; struct pending_irq *p; diff --git a/xen/include/asm-arm/event.h b/xen/include/asm-arm/event.h index e8c2a6cb44..c4c79fa87d 100644 --- a/xen/include/asm-arm/event.h +++ b/xen/include/asm-arm/event.h @@ -24,7 +24,7 @@ static inline int local_events_need_delivery_nomask(void) * interrupts disabled so this shouldn't be a problem in the general * case. */ - if ( gic_events_need_delivery() ) + if ( vgic_pending_irq() )
I am not a big fan of this name either. I would much prefer to follow the suggestion I made in your RFC patch #26.
By that I mean renaming the function vgic_vcpu_pending_irq and take a vCPU in parameter.
For the old vGIC implementation, add an ASSERT(vcpu == current) to catch misuse for the function.
Cheers, -- Julien Grall _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
