From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 00/11] tmem: some basic cleanup Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2013 11:48:37 -0500 Message-ID: <20131104164837.GF6833@phenom.dumpdata.com> References: <1383568854-30521-1-git-send-email-bob.liu@oracle.com> <5277D1B602000078000FF2B6@nat28.tlf.novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail6.bemta4.messagelabs.com ([85.158.143.247]) by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1VdNKj-0000Iu-Hx for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Mon, 04 Nov 2013 16:48:57 +0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5277D1B602000078000FF2B6@nat28.tlf.novell.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Jan Beulich Cc: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, Bob Liu , Bob Liu , keir@xen.org, ian.campbell@citrix.com List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On Mon, Nov 04, 2013 at 03:56:22PM +0000, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>> On 04.11.13 at 13:40, Bob Liu wrote: > > There are too many typedefs and referenced once functions in tmem, perhaps the > > reason was tmem was designed can be ported to other hypersivor easily. > > But when I try to read tmem source code, some of them are not very > > straightforward. This patchset try to clean up them. It's only my thoughts so I > > tag this patchset with RFC. > > If I was the maintainer, or as to make a recommendation, I wouldn't > accept these changes - they were done for a purpose after all. If The purpose for this was done so that if anybody wanted to lift the tmem code out of the hypervisor the "hypervisor-specific" parts would have to be implemented. While the generic ones could be easily copied over. Hence also the two files implementation. But that is not really neccessary nowadays - and the code could all be nicely merged in one file. > anything a re-work from grounds up would seem the only reasonable > option. I am really in favour of the KISS principle and incremental cleanups/fixes is what I am most comfortable with. That is as long as each patch has only _one_ logical change. The same way it is done in the Linux world. > > Jan >