On Mon, Aug 18, 2025 at 2:01 PM David Hildenbrand <david@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 18.08.25 10:27, Pratyush Brahma wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 18, 2025 at 12:29 PM David Hildenbrand <david@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> On 18.08.25 08:41, pratyush.brahma@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > >>> From: Pratyush Brahma <pratyush.brahma@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >>> > >>> The function `memory_add_physaddr_to_nid` seems a misnomer. > >>> It does not to "add" a physical address to a NID mapping, > >>> but rather it gets the NID associated with a given physical address. > >> > >> You probably misunderstood what the function is used for: memory hotplug > >> aka "memory_add". > > Thanks for your feedback. I get the part about memory hotplug here but > > using memory_add still seems a little odd as it doesn't truly reflect > > what this api is doing. > > However, I agree that my current suggestion > > may not be the perfect choice for the name, so I'm open to suggestions. > > > > Perhaps, something like "memory_add_get_nid_by_phys" may work here? > > I don't think this name is really any better and worth the churn :( > Sure. Thanks for taking a look. Will drop this. > -- > Cheers > > David / dhildenb > Thanks & Regards Pratyush
