From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Juergen Gross Subject: Re: [PATCH 2 of 3] support of cpupools in xl: commands and library changes Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2010 11:56:56 +0200 Message-ID: <4CB430E8.4040004@ts.fujitsu.com> References: <91397dcffead19270897.1286536984@nehalem1> <19636.12203.651041.734393@mariner.uk.xensource.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <19636.12203.651041.734393@mariner.uk.xensource.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Ian Jackson Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 10/12/10 11:51, Ian Jackson wrote: > Juergen Gross writes ("[Xen-devel] [PATCH 2 of 3] support of cpupools in xl: commands and library changes"): >> tools/libxl/libxlu_cfg_l.c | 30 -- >> tools/libxl/libxlu_cfg_l.h | 18 - > > I see you reran flex. That's not wrong, but we shouldn't change these > files needlessly, and you didn't make any changes to the .l source > file, so when we apply this patch we should drop the changes to > *_l.[ch]. I excluded these changes once before and was told they should be included... I didn't call flex manually, this was done by make. > >> Renamed all cpu pool related names to *cpupool* > > Is that really true in this patch ? The function names and subcommand > names in xl are still all "pool-*" and "pool_*". There was no response to the question whether to change the sub-command names or not. And I think the sub-command functions should reflect the names. Juergen -- Juergen Gross Principal Developer Operating Systems TSP ES&S SWE OS6 Telephone: +49 (0) 89 3222 2967 Fujitsu Technology Solutions e-mail: juergen.gross@ts.fujitsu.com Domagkstr. 28 Internet: ts.fujitsu.com D-80807 Muenchen Company details: ts.fujitsu.com/imprint.html