From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:46217)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <anthony@codemonkey.ws>) id 1SCDzM-0006QM-9d
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 26 Mar 2012 13:45:57 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <anthony@codemonkey.ws>) id 1SCDzK-0007PP-C6
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 26 Mar 2012 13:45:51 -0400
Received: from mail-ob0-f173.google.com ([209.85.214.173]:64534)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <anthony@codemonkey.ws>) id 1SCDzK-0007PF-5F
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 26 Mar 2012 13:45:50 -0400
Received: by obbwd20 with SMTP id wd20so6275487obb.4
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Mon, 26 Mar 2012 10:45:48 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4F70AB4A.8050000@codemonkey.ws>
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2012 12:45:46 -0500
From: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1332727608-26523-1-git-send-email-liwp@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
	<CAAu8pHu_-btwffeytFFMQ-fogzqda2VO82GbqFS8VsnkZAJ1XA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4F70A8E2.10508@codemonkey.ws>
	<CAAu8pHsE0yF6Pjn-taWrDQqN=KYaSjoYDBQBo1OHqHs0f967Og@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAAu8pHsE0yF6Pjn-taWrDQqN=KYaSjoYDBQBo1OHqHs0f967Og@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/6] refactor PC machine,
 i440fx and piix3 to take advantage of QOM
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Blue Swirl <blauwirbel@gmail.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Anthony Liguori <aliguori@us.ibm.com>, Wanpeng Li <liwp@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>, Gavin Shan <shangw@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

On 03/26/2012 12:43 PM, Blue Swirl wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 17:35, Anthony Liguori<anthony@codemonkey.ws>  wrote:
>> On 03/26/2012 12:09 PM, Blue Swirl wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 02:06, Wanpeng Li<liwp@linux.vnet.ibm.com>    wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> From: Anthony Liguori<aliguori@us.ibm.com>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This series aggressively refactors the PC machine initialization to be
>>>> more
>>>> modelled and less ad-hoc.  The highlights of this series are:
>>>
>>>
>>> Please fix coding style while moving.
>>
>>
>> I disagree.  That makes reviewing the movement and rebasing the movement
>> pretty difficult.
>
> Yes, a separate step would be nice.
>
>> If we were to fix the issues, it should before or after.  But in that
>> context, I think it makes it orthogonal to moving the code and should be
>> treated independently.
>
> I'd fix the style in the first patch, then perform moves etc. That way
> no patch would add noncompliant code, only remove.

Is this something we universally want to do?  What would we do about patches to 
audio?

I'd prefer not to go down this road.  Let's keep discussion of fixing 
CODING_STYLE of existing code separate from rearchitecting/enhancing code.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Anthony Liguori