On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 10:52:14AM +, houzj.f...@fujitsu.com wrote:
> Sorry for the late reply and yes, " Combo CID(s)" looks better.
> Attaching patch which replaces all styles "Combocid(s)" with " Combo CID(s)".
I have double-checked the code, adjusted things a bit to adapt with
some of the
>
> What about "Combo CID(s)", for Combo command ID? README.parallel uses
> this term for example.
Sorry for the late reply and yes, " Combo CID(s)" looks better.
Attaching patch which replaces all styles "Combocid(s)" with " Combo CID(s)".
Best regards,
houzj
On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 07:15:41AM +, Hou, Zhijie wrote:
> I agree that it’s better to have a common way, but some different
> style of combocid follow the variable or functionname[1].
> We may need to change the var name or function name too.
>
> [1]:
> void
> SerializeComboCIDState(Size
> >> Combocid's ==>> Combocids
> >
> > Ping again, just in case it’s missed.
>
> There are in the comments "ComboCIDs", "combocids" and "ComboCids" on top
> of the existing Combocid's. Your patch introduces a fourth way of writing
> that. It may be better to just have one way to govern them
On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 05:57:06AM +, Hou, Zhijie wrote:
>> Combocid's ==>> Combocids
>
> Ping again, just in case it’s missed.
There are in the comments "ComboCIDs", "combocids" and "ComboCids" on
top of the existing Combocid's. Your patch introduces a fourth way of
writing that. It may
> I found a possible typo in reorderbuffer.c
>
> * has got a combocid. Combocid's are only valid for the duration
> of a
>
> Combocid's ==>> Combocids
>
> Attatching a small patch to correct it.
>
Ping again, just in case it’s missed.
