On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 01:27:46AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>> On 25.08.17 at 18:05, <wei.l...@citrix.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 09:54:18AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: > >> >>> On 25.08.17 at 17:25, <wei.l...@citrix.com> wrote: > >> > On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 06:20:01AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: > >> >> So far callers of the libxc interface passed in a domain ID which was > >> >> then ignored in the hypervisor. Instead, make the hypervisor honor it > >> >> (accepting DOMID_INVALID to obtain original behavior), allowing to > >> >> query whether a device can be assigned to a particular domain. > >> >> > >> >> Drop XSM's test_assign_{,dt}device hooks as no longer being > >> >> individually useful. > >> > > >> > Can you also say in the commit message that you consolidate some code as > >> > well? > >> > >> Am I consolidating code beyond what is reasonable to achieve > >> the intended effect? I don't view the merging of the two case > >> blocks > >> Oops, didn't finish here: "... as anything going beyond the main > >> > > > > > > > >> purpose of the patch. In fact if someone submitted a patch > >> > > > > > > > >> without doing that folding, I'd ask for it to be done." > > > > It took more effort for reviewers to figure out the reason to delete > > those two blocks just from looking at the diff, which distracted me a > > bit. Of course I eventually figured out why they were deleted by looking > > at the actual files, but had that been stated in commit message I could > > have finished the review sooner because I would have a list of things to > > look for in my mind and go through them faster. > > Okay, I've added "Do this by folding the assign and test-assign paths" > to the first paragraph. I hope that's enough to address your concern. >
Thanks, that sounds good. _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel