On Tue, May 04, 2021 at 01:40:11PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 04.05.2021 12:56, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> > On Mon, May 03, 2021 at 12:41:29PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> On 30.04.2021 17:52, Roger Pau Monne wrote:
> >>> --- a/tools/libs/guest/xg_cpuid_x86.c
> >>> +++ b/tools/libs/guest/xg_cpuid_x86.c
> >>> @@ -850,3 +850,45 @@ int xc_cpu_policy_get_cpuid(xc_interface *xch, const
> >>> xc_cpu_policy_t policy,
> >>> *out = *tmp;
> >>> return 0;
> >>> }
> >>> +
> >>> +static int compare_entries(const void *l, const void *r)
> >>> +{
> >>> + const xen_msr_entry_t *lhs = l;
> >>> + const xen_msr_entry_t *rhs = r;
> >>> +
> >>> + if ( lhs->idx == rhs->idx )
> >>> + return 0;
> >>> + return lhs->idx < rhs->idx ? -1 : 1;
> >>> +}
> >>> +
> >>> +static xen_msr_entry_t *find_entry(xen_msr_entry_t *entries,
> >>> + unsigned int nr_entries, unsigned int
> >>> index)
> >>> +{
> >>> + const xen_msr_entry_t key = { index };
> >>> +
> >>> + return bsearch(&key, entries, nr_entries, sizeof(*entries),
> >>> compare_entries);
> >>> +}
> >>
> >> Isn't "entries" / "entry" a little too generic a name here, considering
> >> the CPUID equivalents use "leaves" / "leaf"? (Noticed really while looking
> >> at patch 7.)
> >
> > Would you be fine with naming the function find_msr and leaving the
> > rest of the parameters names as-is?
>
> Yes. But recall I'm not the maintainer of this code anyway.
You cared to provide feedback, and I'm happy to make the change.
Thanks, Roger.
