From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MqRSc-0000r0-Py for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 23 Sep 2009 09:00:42 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MqRSV-0000pG-Uz for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 23 Sep 2009 09:00:41 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=53556 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MqRSV-0000p6-ID for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 23 Sep 2009 09:00:35 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:60020) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MqRSV-0002bz-0s for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 23 Sep 2009 09:00:35 -0400 Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2009 15:58:18 +0300 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Message-ID: <20090923125818.GA13875@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Subject: [Qemu-devel] comments on: get page size in device init List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, anthony@codemonkey.ws, Blue Swirl > Compile msix only once > > Get page size in device init. > > Signed-off-by: Blue Swirl What was the motivation for the page size change? It seems the only user passes TARGET_PAGE_SIZE anyway, using a constant seems clearer and probably generates less code. No? Did I miss this patch on qemu-devel? Generally, it's nice to have patches posted to list to give people a chance to comment, before they are pushed to the public tree. Right? Finally, the 2 changes seem unrelated: why was it a good idea to bundle them in one commit? Thanks, -- MST