From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:42392) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dzjOy-0001HT-CN for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 04 Oct 2017 09:07:57 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dzjOx-0006FV-Fm for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 04 Oct 2017 09:07:52 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:44720) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dzjOx-0006Ej-9B for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 04 Oct 2017 09:07:51 -0400 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6D103780D6 for ; Wed, 4 Oct 2017 13:07:50 +0000 (UTC) References: <20171004103933.7898-1-quintela@redhat.com> <20171004103933.7898-2-quintela@redhat.com> <18ba5f7e-0d7e-fc5e-6cff-36ede10233f0@redhat.com> <87infvgjx1.fsf@secure.laptop> From: Thomas Huth Message-ID: <2031be1e-62d1-1605-1f11-24868fbbc635@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2017 15:07:45 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <87infvgjx1.fsf@secure.laptop> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/6] tests: Add basic migration precopy test List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: quintela@redhat.com Cc: lvivier@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, peterx@redhat.com, dgilbert@redhat.com On 04.10.2017 14:46, Juan Quintela wrote: > Thomas Huth wrote: >> On 04.10.2017 12:39, Juan Quintela wrote: >>> Signed-off-by: Juan Quintela > >> >> Looks like a lot of this code is the same or very similar to the code in >> postcopy-test.c ... would it make sense to factor-out that code there >> into a separate file that could be used by both tests, so that we do not >> have to maintain the code twice? > > > I think I put that on the cover letter, my idea is to add the postcopy > test here. OK, then I think you should remove the duplicated functions from postcopy-test.c in the same patch here, so that it is more obvious that this is a code movement. Thomas PS: Please also add an entry to MAINTAINERS for the new files if feasible.