On Thu, Dec 11, 2025 at 03:16:52PM +0800, Xiaoyao Li wrote: > On 11/20/2025 1:29 AM, Peter Xu wrote: > > Rename the HostMemoryBackend.guest_memfd field to reflect what it really > > means, on whether it needs guest_memfd to back its private portion of > > mapping. This will help on clearance when we introduce in-place > > guest_memfd for hostmem. > > > > Signed-off-by: Peter Xu <[email protected]> > > Reviewed-by: Xiaoyao Li <[email protected]> > > <...> > > > diff --git a/backends/hostmem.c b/backends/hostmem.c > > index 35734d6f4d..70450733db 100644 > > --- a/backends/hostmem.c > > +++ b/backends/hostmem.c > > @@ -288,7 +288,7 @@ static void host_memory_backend_init(Object *obj) > > /* TODO: convert access to globals to compat properties */ > > backend->merge = machine_mem_merge(machine); > > backend->dump = machine_dump_guest_core(machine); > > - backend->guest_memfd = machine_require_guest_memfd(machine); > > + backend->guest_memfd_private = machine_require_guest_memfd(machine); > > btw, how about a separate patch to rename > > machine_require_guest_memfd() to machine_require_guest_memfd_private()? > > and another patch to rename memory_region_init_ram_guest_memfd()?
Sounds all reasonable, will do. Thanks, -- Peter Xu
