From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:42161) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cQyV2-0000KW-CB for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 10 Jan 2017 10:38:13 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cQyUx-0006fg-OF for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 10 Jan 2017 10:38:12 -0500 Received: from mail-wm0-x242.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c09::242]:35592) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cQyUx-0006fV-IV for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 10 Jan 2017 10:38:07 -0500 Received: by mail-wm0-x242.google.com with SMTP id l2so30676695wml.2 for ; Tue, 10 Jan 2017 07:38:07 -0800 (PST) Sender: Paolo Bonzini References: <1479108340-3453-1-git-send-email-caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> <20170109234446-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <87bmvftejz.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> <20170110162151-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> From: Paolo Bonzini Message-ID: <117edb31-5328-18fb-00d8-604e0e9f2757@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2017 16:38:05 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20170110162151-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v7 00/10] Convert msix_init() to error List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" , Markus Armbruster Cc: Jiri Pirko , Jason Wang , Cao jin , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Dmitry Fleytman , Alex Williamson , Hannes Reinecke , Marcel Apfelbaum , Gerd Hoffmann On 10/01/2017 15:38, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 11:06:08AM +0100, Markus Armbruster wrote: >> "Michael S. Tsirkin" writes: >> >>> On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 03:25:30PM +0800, Cao jin wrote: >>>> v7 changelog: >>>> 1. fix the segfaut bug in patch 2. So drop the all the R-b of it, >>>> please take a look, there is detailed description in the patch. >>>> 2. add the R-b from Hannes Reinecke >>>> >>>> Test: >>>> 1. make check: pass >>>> 2. After applied all the patch, command line test for all the >>>> affected devices, just make sure device realize process is ok, >>>> no crash, but no further use of device. >>> >>> Consider the megasas device for example, don't you >>> need to test that the change actually does what >>> it's intended to do? >> >> For better or worse, that's a higher bar than we commonly require for >> refactorings. >> >> [...] > > Well the patch says that it's addressing a TODO. If no one can > be bothered to test the functionality, maybe we shouldn't bother > with the change. > > Generally this patchset is at v7. It brings a very limited benefit to > the project. It better be perfect otherwise I don't see why bother. I agree. The changes to the device model are non-trivial and you should make a decent effort at coverage of non-trivial changes. Paolo