From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ian Campbell Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] xl: convert scheduling related return codes to EXIT_[SUCCESS|FAILURE] Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2015 10:56:21 +0100 Message-ID: <1445594181.2374.99.camel@citrix.com> References: <1445586491-15093-1-git-send-email-write.harmandeep@gmail.com> <1445589018.5117.8.camel@citrix.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail6.bemta14.messagelabs.com ([193.109.254.103]) by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1ZpZ5G-0004gn-QM for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Fri, 23 Oct 2015 09:56:26 +0000 In-Reply-To: <1445589018.5117.8.camel@citrix.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: Dario Faggioli , Harmandeep Kaur , xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Cc: wei.liu2@citrix.com, stefano.stebellini@eu.citrix.com, ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com, george.dunlap@citrix.com, Lars Kurth List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On Fri, 2015-10-23 at 10:30 +0200, Dario Faggioli wrote: > On Fri, 2015-10-23 at 13:18 +0530, Harmandeep Kaur wrote: > > turning scheduling related functions xl exit codes towards using the > > EXIT_[SUCCESS|FAILURE] macros, instead of instead of arbitrary > > numbers > > or libxl return codes. > > > So, it's probably worth mentioning that this is Harman's "bite size > contribution" that is required for applying to the Outreachy program. > > Harman, when you send a patch series, as you did here (thanks and good > job doing it so quickly :-) ), you want to include a 'cover letter'. That > is an introductory email, often labelled (usually automatically by git > tools) as patch 0 of the series itself. In it, you give a brief > explanation of what the series is meant at, and any kind of information > you think the people reviewing the series should have, but that wouldn't > fit in the various patches' changelogs, code comments, etc. In particular in this case I would like to know whether all xl functions now use EXIT_SUCCESS/FAILURE or if there is still inconsistencies/work to be done. I don't see any existing use of of EXIT_* in xl*. > > For instance, in this case, you could have mentioned (among other things) > that this is your small contribution for the sake of applying to > Outreachy right in there. :-) > > Thanks and Regards, > Dario