From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dario Faggioli Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/4] Implement cbs algorithm, remove extra queues, latency scaling, and weight support from sedf Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2014 04:19:19 +0200 Message-ID: <1403921959.8515.127.camel@Solace> References: <1402689488-3577-1-git-send-email-josh.whitehead@dornerworks.com> <1402689488-3577-2-git-send-email-josh.whitehead@dornerworks.com> <1403019825.16864.176.camel@Solace> <53AC7FF0.2080206@dornerworks.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============4447533807042044010==" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <53AC7FF0.2080206@dornerworks.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Joshua Whitehead Cc: Ian Campbell , Stefano Stabellini , George Dunlap , Ian Jackson , Robert VanVossen , Xen-devel , Nate Studer List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org --===============4447533807042044010== Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-0HzeY1Vqv4w6oKTFhpET" --=-0HzeY1Vqv4w6oKTFhpET Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On gio, 2014-06-26 at 16:17 -0400, Joshua Whitehead wrote: > On 6/17/2014 11:43 AM, Dario Faggioli wrote: > > As I said, it's very hard to review the patch like this... Let me know > > if you agree in splitting it, in which case, I'd rather have a look at > > that version when it'll be ready. > >=20 > Yes I think splitting (as well as some of the other reorganization mentio= ned > elsewhere) would be best and make it easier to review. Some of the above= would > also depend on how we decided to handle the input from George as it sound= s like > he doesn't feel it would cause much of an issue to change the parameters = around. > I can't promise anything as we have other projects going on concurrently= , but > maybe we'll shoot to have a reorganized and cleaned up V2 out by next wee= k. > Saying it once more, that would be great. As per the renaming/removing, I'd say, for v2, do as George said. Change in place, rename and remove the list (nothing?), at least from the interface, and change the behavior whenever required. Also, make sure you comply with the API stability requirement, at the libxl level, as suggested also by George, by means of the proper LIBXL_HAVE_xxx and/or LIBXL_API_VERSION_xxx macros. There are usage examples of both, in libxl sources. Thanks and Regards, Dario --=20 <> (Raistlin Majere) ----------------------------------------------------------------- Dario Faggioli, Ph.D, http://about.me/dario.faggioli Senior Software Engineer, Citrix Systems R&D Ltd., Cambridge (UK) --=-0HzeY1Vqv4w6oKTFhpET Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iEYEABECAAYFAlOuJicACgkQk4XaBE3IOsRBeACfcOuhsN2RCdZNMSxm4hrP8A2n 0F8An1HGYNuiP8+8CQm3Q3twRzCt11XD =fEKO -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-0HzeY1Vqv4w6oKTFhpET-- --===============4447533807042044010== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel --===============4447533807042044010==--