Re: [DOC RFC] Heterogeneous Multi Processing Support in Xen

[Dario Faggioli <dario.faggioli@citrix.com>]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2509 bytes --]

On Wed, 2017-03-01 at 02:05 +0200, Anastassios Nanos wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 8:29 PM, Dario Faggioli
> <dario.faggioli@citrix.com> wrote:
> > 
> > % Heterogeneous Multi Processing Support in Xen
> > % Revision 1
> > 
> > [...]
> Hi all,
> 
Hello,

> We are sending a branch[1] for comments on an initial implementation
> of the above design document. Essentially it targets the ARM
> big.LITTLE architecture. 
>
W00t ?!?! Just the fact that you did this, it is just great... thanks
for that.

> It would be great if you guys could comment
> on the changes and provide some guidance for us to get it upstream.
> 
I'm sure up for that. I already know I won't have time to look at it
until next week. But I'll make some space to look at the code then (I'm
travelling, so I won't be furiously doing my own development anyway).

> We have tested it on an odroid xu4 [2] and we are able to boot guests
> with mixed vcpu affinities (big and LITTLE).
> 
Great to hear this too.

> We are more than happy to submit patches once we address the issues
> and come up with a review-able version of this implementation.
> 
Sure. So, from just a very quick glance, I can see an unique giant
commit. This is ok for now, and I will look at it as it is.

But, for sure, the first step toward making things reviewable, is to
split the big patch in a series of smaller patches, as you probably
know yourself already. :-)

Since you're touching different component (as in, hypervisor,
toolstack, build system, etc), splitting at the component boundaries is
quite often something we want and ask for.

Another criteria, orthogonal to the one cited above, is to separate
patches that change architecture specific code, from patches that
touches common areas.

But, in general, the principle to follow is to split the patches at the
"logical boundary", as this tries to explain:
https://wiki.xenproject.org/wiki/Submitting_Xen_Project_Patches#Break_down_your_patches

It's a rather difficult call, especially for changes like this.
Therefore, as a first and fundamental step toward reviewability, I'd
suggest start thinking at how to do the splitup.

Anyway, I'll let you have my comments.

Regards,
Dario
-- 
<<This happens because I choose it to happen!>> (Raistlin Majere)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Dario Faggioli, Ph.D, http://about.me/dario.faggioli
Senior Software Engineer, Citrix Systems R&D Ltd., Cambridge (UK)

[-- Attachment #1.2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 127 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel