On 06.06.2025 21:49, dm...@proton.me wrote: > From: Denis Mukhin <dmuk...@ford.com> > > Group all pbuf-related data structures under domain's console field.
Fine with me in principle, as I was indeed wondering about the lack of grouping when the sub-struct was introduced, but ... > @@ -654,6 +648,12 @@ struct domain > > /* Console settings. */ > struct { > + /* hvm_print_line() and guest_console_write() logging. */ > +#define DOMAIN_PBUF_SIZE 200 > + char *pbuf; > + unsigned int pbuf_idx; > + spinlock_t pbuf_lock; > + > /* Permission to take ownership of the physical console input. */ > bool input_allowed; > } console; ... since all uses of the fields need touching anyway, can we perhaps think of giving the fields better names? I never understood what the 'p' in "pbuf" actually stands for, for example. My suggestion would be to replace "pbuf" by "glog" (for "guest logging"), but surely there are alternatives. Jan