From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Chen, Tiejun" Subject: Re: [v4][PATCH 11/19] tools: introduce some new parameters to set rdm policy Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2015 12:47:22 +0800 Message-ID: <5594C25A.4020609@intel.com> References: <1435053450-25131-1-git-send-email-tiejun.chen@intel.com> <1435053450-25131-12-git-send-email-tiejun.chen@intel.com> <55933F7C.2050607@intel.com> <5593BBC8.1010402@eu.citrix.com> <5593C063.7000705@intel.com> <5593C7AC.8030901@eu.citrix.com> <5593CC19.9020200@intel.com> <5593EB53.5000601@eu.citrix.com> <55948FA7.8020007@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <55948FA7.8020007@intel.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: George Dunlap Cc: Wei Liu , "xen-devel@lists.xen.org" , Ian Jackson , Ian Campbell , Stefano Stabellini List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org >> I don't happen to think these "override" semantics are actually going to >> turn out to be that useful; I do think a "default" semantic would be >> useful. But I'd be content if the name of the current setting were >> switched to "override" to make the semantics more clear. We can always >> add in "default" at some later point if we really want. >> > > Just as I said you'd better ping Jan or Kevin to make a point. > I just have a talk with Kevin, and he think this is fine to him but I'm still not sure what's Jan's idea. Anyway, this shouldn't a big deal to change code so just let me follow yours right now. Thanks Tiejun