From: "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com>
To: Yi Sun <yi.y.sun@linux.intel.com>
Cc: wei.liu2@citrix.com, he.chen@linux.intel.com,
andrew.cooper3@citrix.com, ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com,
chao.p.peng@linux.intel.com, xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 04/15] x86: refactor psr: Encapsulate 'cbm_len' and 'cbm_max'
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2016 02:42:20 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <583EAD0C0200007800123969@prv-mh.provo.novell.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161130090810.GF7435@yi.y.sun>
>>> On 30.11.16 at 10:08, <yi.y.sun@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> On 16-11-29 02:43:24, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> >>> On 29.11.16 at 05:38, <yi.y.sun@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>> > To make codes be better reviewable, I propose below three suggestions:
>> > 1) I write a design document about refactor to make you more easily
>> > understand the ideas.
>>
>> This is appreciated, but I don't think it's strictly necessary. Describing
>> the new design (rather than the changes to the existing one) is what
>> likely would be more useful (I'm sorry if I've misunderstood what you
>> said, and you in fact had meant just this), which iirc you already have
>> in patch 1.
>>
>> > 2) Replace the psr.c with a new file which discards all old codes so
>> > that you do not need to consider old implementations which may cause
>> > confusion.
>> > 3) Discard the refactor codes. Just implement L2 CAT based on current
>> > codes. Because L2 CAT does not have much difference with L3.
>>
>> I don't think introducing a new file is the ideal approach. I'd suggest
>> to rip out the entire implementation in a first patch, leaving just
>> empty functions to avoid breaking the build (i.e. perhaps mostly the
>> ones used by domctl/sysctl, and maybe some init one). Then
>> introduce new code, ideally of course not in one big patch, but
>> broken up into logical pieces where possible (one such split would be
>> that of course you don't need to re-implement domctl/sysctl handling
>> in the same patch as everything else).
>>
> Thanks for your suggestion! Just want to confirm if my understanding is
> right. So, you mean I can remove all old codes but keep the interfaces as
> empty functions to make sure the build can pass. Then, implement whole
> functionality step by step. Right?
Yes.
Thanks, Jan
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-11-30 9:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-10-25 3:40 [PATCH v3 00/15] Enable L2 Cache Allocation Technology Yi Sun
2016-10-25 3:40 ` [PATCH v3 01/15] docs: L2 Cache Allocation Technology (CAT) feature document Yi Sun
2016-10-25 13:37 ` Jan Beulich
2016-10-26 1:01 ` Yi Sun
2016-10-30 15:51 ` Meng Xu
2016-11-01 4:40 ` Yi Sun
2016-11-11 21:33 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2016-11-14 2:15 ` Yi Sun
2016-11-25 17:19 ` Dario Faggioli
2016-11-29 5:20 ` Yi Sun
2016-11-29 12:25 ` Dario Faggioli
2016-11-25 17:39 ` Dario Faggioli
2016-11-29 4:52 ` Yi Sun
2016-11-29 12:22 ` Dario Faggioli
2016-11-30 1:42 ` Yi Sun
2016-10-25 3:40 ` [PATCH v3 02/15] x86: refactor psr: Split 'ref' out Yi Sun
2016-11-25 15:19 ` Jan Beulich
2016-10-25 3:40 ` [PATCH v3 03/15] x86: refactor psr: Remove 'struct psr_cat_cbm' Yi Sun
2016-11-25 15:45 ` Jan Beulich
2016-10-25 3:40 ` [PATCH v3 04/15] x86: refactor psr: Encapsulate 'cbm_len' and 'cbm_max' Yi Sun
2016-11-25 16:27 ` Jan Beulich
2016-11-25 16:57 ` Jan Beulich
2016-11-29 4:38 ` Yi Sun
2016-11-29 9:43 ` Jan Beulich
2016-11-30 9:08 ` Yi Sun
2016-11-30 9:42 ` Jan Beulich [this message]
2016-11-30 10:22 ` Yi Sun
2016-10-25 3:40 ` [PATCH v3 05/15] x86: refactor psr: Use 'feat_mask' to record featues enabled Yi Sun
2016-11-25 16:36 ` Jan Beulich
2016-10-25 3:40 ` [PATCH v3 06/15] x86: refactor psr: Create feature list Yi Sun
2016-10-25 3:40 ` [PATCH v3 07/15] x86: refactor psr: Implement feature operations structure Yi Sun
2016-10-25 3:40 ` [PATCH v3 08/15] x86: refactor psr: Implement get hw info callback function Yi Sun
2016-10-25 3:40 ` [PATCH v3 09/15] x86: refactor psr: Implement get value " Yi Sun
2016-10-25 3:40 ` [PATCH v3 10/15] x86: refactor psr: Implement function to get the max cos_max Yi Sun
2016-10-25 3:40 ` [PATCH v3 11/15] x86: refactor psr: Implement set value callback function Yi Sun
2016-10-25 3:41 ` [PATCH v3 12/15] x86: Implement L2 CAT in psr.c Yi Sun
2016-10-25 3:41 ` [PATCH v3 13/15] x86: Add L2 CAT interfaces in domctl Yi Sun
2016-10-25 3:41 ` [PATCH v3 14/15] x86: Add L2 CAT interfaces in sysctl Yi Sun
2016-10-25 3:41 ` [PATCH v3 15/15] tools & docs: add L2 CAT support in tools and docs Yi Sun
2016-11-09 1:28 ` [PATCH v3 00/15] Enable L2 Cache Allocation Technology Yi Sun
2016-11-09 8:37 ` Jan Beulich
2016-11-10 1:56 ` Yi Sun
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=583EAD0C0200007800123969@prv-mh.provo.novell.com \
--to=jbeulich@suse.com \
--cc=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
--cc=chao.p.peng@linux.intel.com \
--cc=he.chen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com \
--cc=wei.liu2@citrix.com \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org \
--cc=yi.y.sun@linux.intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.