Re: [v10][PATCH 16/16] tools: parse to enable new rdm policy parameters

["Chen, Tiejun" <tiejun.chen@intel.com>]

> For clarity:
>
> I am not acking this patch, primarily because I am not happy with the
> code in xlu_rdm_parse which is (a) the result of repeated
> clone-and-hack and (b) consists of ad-hoc string pointer fiddling.

Yes, I knew you mentioned this previously but I also remember our last 
deal was something as follows:

">>> Really I would prefer that this parsing was done with a miniature flex
 >>> parser, rather than ad-hoc pointer arithmetic and use of strtok.
 >>
 >> Sorry, could you show this explicitly?
 >
 > Something like what was done for disk devices.  See libxlu_disk_l.l
 > for an example.  In this case your code would be a lot less
 > complicated than what you see there.
 >
 > After the codefreeze I would probably have some time to write it for

Sounds yourself would do this so currently I just keep the original, right?

Thanks
Tiejun

 > you.  (I think that would be valuable because libxlu_disk_l.l is a
 > very complicated example, and I want be able to point future
 > submitters at something simpler.)
 >
 > Ian."

Then I didn't receive any response again so I thought yourself made this 
promise.

Thanks
Tiejun

>
> If I had been able to review this patch earlier in the release cycle I
> would be explictly nacking this patch.  It is true that maybe someone
> will have some time to clean this up later; but in practice it often
> turns out that they don't - which is why we usually try not to accept
> patches on the basis of promises to do further cleanup.
>
> However, I am late to this party.  I first made this complaint in
> response to v7 on the 9th of July.  Under the circumstances I am going
> to stand aside and neither ack nor nack this patch.
>
> The rules then say that the patch may be committed given that it has
> Wei's ack as a tools maintainer.
>
> Ian.
>