On 27/07/23 13:27, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 27.07.2023 13:02, Federico Serafini wrote:I have ready a patch for violations of rules 8.2 and 8.3 in xen/include/xen/iommu.h. I am talking about this, in this IRQ thread, because I think the following two options also apply for an eventual v2 patch for the IRQ module, until a decision about rule 8.2 and function pointers is taken: 1) Split patches and submit only the changes *not* involving function pointers. 2) In the meantime that you make a decision, I submit patches thus addressing the existing violations. I personally prefer the second one, but please let me know what you think.It's not entirely clear to me what 2 means, as I wouldn't expect you intend to deal with "violations" which we may decide aren't any in out world. Jan
In point 2) I would like to act as if the rule 8.2 had been approved without any deviation, I think this will lead to a smaller number of patches and a smaller amount of text attached to each modified function.
If you are concerned about inconsistency between the resulting commit messages and your future decision then we can go for option 1). -- Federico Serafini, M.Sc. Software Engineer, BUGSENG (http://bugseng.com)
