On 02/13/2018 08:46 AM, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
> On Tue, 2018-02-13 at 07:22 -0500, John Ferlan wrote:
>>> Another approach, which didn't make it to the list for some reason,
>>> was to end the comment with
>>>   [...] and so on. See virDomainDefFeaturesCheckABIStability() for
>>>   more details.
>>> That seems like a better way to handle the ever-changing nature of
>>> libvirt than a comment, don't you think?
>> That's fine... I guess since you started listing them I figured adding
>> another in the next patch was "natural".
>> How about this (or something close to it):
>> "Most {hyperv_|kvm_|cpu_}feature options utilize a virTristateSwitch to
>> handle support. A few assign specific data values to the option. See
>> virDomainDefFeaturesCheckABIStability for details."
> I've changed it to match your suggestion.
> I've also addressed all other review comments as described in my
> previous replies. Do you have any objections to those? Should I
> send out a v2, or should I just go ahead and push the series given
> the minor nature of the adjustments?

I see no need for a v2 since the adjustments were essentially minor.
Consider some of those comments a replacement for you (or I) being able
to walk across the big pond in order to toss random thoughts or ideas
that spring to mind when I'm reading patches. Many times it's just what
I'm thinking as I'm reading. If it gives you an aha moment to describe
or do something different, then great. If it's utter nonesense, then no
big deal either ;-).


libvir-list mailing list

Reply via email to