On 16-11-29 02:43:24, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>> On 29.11.16 at 05:38, <yi.y....@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). > > Jan > 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?
Thanks, Sun Yi _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xenfirstname.lastname@example.org https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel