From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DA92C433FE for ; Tue, 12 Oct 2021 14:38:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BA6976101D for ; Tue, 12 Oct 2021 14:38:08 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org BA6976101D Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:40594 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1maIut-0004zk-Qa for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Tue, 12 Oct 2021 10:38:07 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:34928) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1maIte-0003f9-N0 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 12 Oct 2021 10:36:51 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([216.205.24.124]:22124) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1maIta-0006EK-LU for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 12 Oct 2021 10:36:49 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1634049404; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=e3PmykkPSRVZ4aqIn1IhuLEihdsg0fqeuPd9tPIPvTA=; b=AkDxwLc9gj/DZ40GWIspM8kvqk9uCAaXLmUmOHIaqPMD39H1Q5Le51TfaO526EciO/RpJ7 FgXplne9j7TYBU90iUELqzlGtVGExNHWKngSIXDE6Igqkrzql+eP8+aRuwo72lhhM3hPK0 VGgnMpPt5Lchn8w6ypeVjElVAysGonc= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-159-J3RuSIU2O3SdpmEBdP6s1Q-1; Tue, 12 Oct 2021 10:36:41 -0400 X-MC-Unique: J3RuSIU2O3SdpmEBdP6s1Q-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1F991100D686; Tue, 12 Oct 2021 14:36:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from blackfin.pond.sub.org (ovpn-112-14.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.112.14]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9C538163E2; Tue, 12 Oct 2021 14:36:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: by blackfin.pond.sub.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 8E8A5113865F; Tue, 12 Oct 2021 16:36:05 +0200 (CEST) From: Markus Armbruster To: "wangyanan (Y)" Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] hw/core/machine: Split out smp_parse as an inline API References: <20211010103954.20644-1-wangyanan55@huawei.com> <20211010103954.20644-2-wangyanan55@huawei.com> <8735p8xhc4.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2021 16:36:05 +0200 In-Reply-To: (wangyanan's message of "Mon, 11 Oct 2021 15:54:24 +0800") Message-ID: <87a6je48fe.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 on 10.5.11.23 Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=armbru@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain Received-SPF: pass client-ip=216.205.24.124; envelope-from=armbru@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com X-Spam_score_int: -28 X-Spam_score: -2.9 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.9 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.049, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Andrew Jones , Daniel =?utf-8?Q?P=2EBerrang=C3=A9?= , Eduardo Habkost , Pierre Morel , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Paolo Bonzini , wanghaibin.wang@huawei.com, Philippe =?utf-8?Q?Mathieu-Daud?= =?utf-8?Q?=C3=A9?= Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" "wangyanan (Y)" writes: > Hi Markus, > > On 2021/10/11 13:26, Markus Armbruster wrote: >> Yanan Wang writes: >> >>> Functionally smp_parse() is only called once and in one place >>> i.e. machine_set_smp, the possible second place where it'll be >>> called should be some unit tests if any. >>> >>> Actually we are going to introduce an unit test for the parser. >>> For necessary isolation of the tested code, split smp_parse out >>> into a separate header as an inline API. >> Why inline? > The motivation of the splitting is to isolate the tested smp_parse > from the other unrelated code in machine.c, so that we can solve > the build dependency problem for the unit test. > > I once tried to split smp_parse out into a source file in [1] for the > test, but it looks more concise and convenient to make it as an > inline function in a header compared to [1]. Given that we only call > it in one place, it may not be harmful to keep it an inline. > > Anyway, I not sure the method in this patch is most appropriate > and compliant. If it's just wrong I can change back to [1]. :) > > [1] > https://lore.kernel.org/qemu-devel/20210910073025.16480-16-wangyanan55@huawei.com/#t I'd prefer to keep it in .c, but I'm not the maintainer.