From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:51203) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YSK69-0001ov-I6 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 02 Mar 2015 01:45:02 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YSK68-0002eJ-KS for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 02 Mar 2015 01:45:01 -0500 Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2015 12:14:41 +0530 From: Amit Shah Message-ID: <20150302064441.GM26196@grmbl.mre> References: <1424365943-27563-1-git-send-email-thuth@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1424365943-27563-2-git-send-email-thuth@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20150224092829.GA26558@grmbl.mre> <20150224172836.5aa5290f@oc7435384737.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150224172836.5aa5290f@oc7435384737.ibm.com> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/5] migration: Remove unused functions List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Thomas Huth Cc: qemu-trivial@nongnu.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Juan Quintela On (Tue) 24 Feb 2015 [17:28:36], Thomas Huth wrote: > On Tue, 24 Feb 2015 14:58:29 +0530 > Amit Shah wrote: > > > On (Thu) 19 Feb 2015 [18:12:19], Thomas Huth wrote: > > > dup_mig_bytes_transferred(), skipped_mig_bytes_transferred(), > > > migrate_rdma_pin_all(), qsb_clone() and qsb_set_length() > > > are completely unused and thus can be deleted. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth > > > Cc: Juan Quintela > > > Cc: Amit Shah > > > --- > > > arch_init.c | 10 ------- > > > include/migration/migration.h | 3 -- > > > include/migration/qemu-file.h | 2 - > > > migration/migration.c | 9 ------- > > > migration/qemu-file-buf.c | 53 ----------------------------------------- > > > 5 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 77 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/arch_init.c b/arch_init.c > > > index 89c8fa4..ad5ce28 100644 > > > --- a/arch_init.c > > > +++ b/arch_init.c > > > @@ -249,21 +249,11 @@ static void acct_clear(void) > > > memset(&acct_info, 0, sizeof(acct_info)); > > > } > > > > > > -uint64_t dup_mig_bytes_transferred(void) > > > -{ > > > - return acct_info.dup_pages * TARGET_PAGE_SIZE; > > > -} > > > - > > > uint64_t dup_mig_pages_transferred(void) > > > { > > > return acct_info.dup_pages; > > > } > > > > > > -uint64_t skipped_mig_bytes_transferred(void) > > > -{ > > > - return acct_info.skipped_pages * TARGET_PAGE_SIZE; > > > -} > > > > These could be used for reporting; Juan, any idea why these aren't > > used? > > Since they are very trivial, I think they could easily be re-added > again in case they are needed again in the future. > Or if you prefer, I can also rework my patch so that these two > functions won't get deleted. I'm just asking Juan if he knows why these are around; I don't mind if we get rid of them, but good to get confirmation from Juan (else we needlessly end up churning code). Amit