All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Anthony PERARD <anthony@xenproject.org>
To: Jahan Murudi <jahan.murudi.zg@renesas.com>
Cc: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org,
	Anthony PERARD <anthony.perard@vates.tech>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/4]  xentop: add physical CPU usage support
Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2025 19:07:00 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <aLh1tLB0ue379Kwu@l14> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aLhnZ1AsqZoM8nPd@l14>

On Wed, Sep 03, 2025 at 06:06:01PM +0200, Anthony PERARD wrote:
> Hi Jahan,
> 
> On Wed, Sep 03, 2025 at 03:53:19PM +0530, Jahan Murudi wrote:
> > This is v4 of the patch series to add physical CPU monitoring to xentop.
> > 
> > Changes since v3:
> > -   Split the single large patch into a logical series of 3 smaller patches
> >     for easier review.
> 
> The single patch in v3 was fine to review. It didn't really need to be
> cut into several patches. Having one file change per patch is certainly
> the worse possible way to cut one patch into several.
> 
> It might have been possible to separate into several patch in another
> way, but it's a bit too late for that, there's already been several
> reviews. What I like to do when I review a patch series, is to look at
> the difference since the last review I gave, tools like
> `git range-diff` and https://patchew.org/Xen/ can help with that.
> 
> Anyway, squashing back all the patch is the way to go I think.
> 
> I'll have a look at the changes.

So the code looks good, but only if it is a single patch like on v3.
Would you be fine if I merge the change, but squash all patch of v4
together and take the patch description from v3? (or the patch
description of the last patch with "integrate" replace by "introduce".)

If I do the squashing, I'll just ignore the remark to use "unsigned int"
instead of "int".

With all patch squash together, more or less: Reviewed-by: Anthony
PERARD <anthony.perard@vates.tech>

Cheers,

-- 
Anthony PERARD


  reply	other threads:[~2025-09-03 17:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-09-03 10:23 [PATCH v4 0/4] xentop: add physical CPU usage support Jahan Murudi
2025-09-03 10:23 ` [PATCH v4 1/4] xentop: add pcpu header and basic infrastructure Jahan Murudi
2025-09-03 10:23 ` [PATCH v4 2/4] xentop: add pcpu implementation with proper error handling Jahan Murudi
2025-09-03 17:00   ` Anthony PERARD
2025-09-03 10:23 ` [PATCH v4 3/4] xentop: update Makefile to link against libxenctrl Jahan Murudi
2025-09-03 10:23 ` [PATCH v4 4/4] xentop: integrate pcpu support into main program Jahan Murudi
2025-09-03 16:05 ` [PATCH v4 0/4] xentop: add physical CPU usage support Anthony PERARD
2025-09-03 17:07   ` Anthony PERARD [this message]
2025-09-03 18:01     ` Jahan Murudi

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=aLh1tLB0ue379Kwu@l14 \
    --to=anthony@xenproject.org \
    --cc=anthony.perard@vates.tech \
    --cc=jahan.murudi.zg@renesas.com \
    --cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.