On 07/18/2018 09:28 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
On 18/07/2018 16:23, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
+struct QOSGraphObject {
+ /* for produces, returns void * */
+ QOSGetDriver get_driver;
Unused?
+ /* for contains, returns a QOSGraphObject * */
+ QOSGetDevice get_device;
Unused?
What is unused?
Neither of these fields are used in this patch. Please introduce them
in the first patch that actually uses them. This way code review can
proceed linearly and it also prevents deadcode when just part of a patch
series is merged or backported.
So do you suggest to squash patch 6 into this one, so that a user of
QOSGraphObject exists already here?
I think he's right, it makes no sense to have qos-graph as patch 6, it
could go as patch 2, even though by that time no object/node exist yet.
Moreover, right now no file in patch 3-4-5 is actually compiled until
patch 6, which is easily prone to errors in case of future edits (I too
have this problem right now, when I need to modify sdhci.c and I'm
forced to return to the branch head to compile), so adding it before
would make things more clear.
Thanks,
Paolo
