Re: [Xen-devel] [resend PATCH] xen: common: rbtree: ported updates from linux tree

[Praveen Kumar <kpraveen.lkml@xxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks Jan and Dario for your inputs. Will incorporate your suggested
inputs and share the updated patch.

On Thu, 2017-05-18 at 16:47 +0200, Dario Faggioli wrote:
> On Thu, 2017-05-18 at 07:59 -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > 
> > > 
> > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > On 11.05.17 at 19:21, <kpraveen.lkml@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > 
> > > The patch contains the updated version of rbtree implementation
> > > from linux
> > > kernel tree containing the fixes so far handled.
> > 
> > I suppose this isn't just fixes, but also enhancements. Furthermore
> > I'd appreciate if you recorded the Linux version this was taken
> > from,
> > so that anyone wanting to do another upgrade would know what
> > the baseline is. In any event, as long as this is just a general
> > overhaul and upgrade, I'd like to either see individual bugs
> > pointed
> > out which get fixed _and_ which affect us, or I'd expect this to be
> > part of a series which actually requires some of the new
> > functionality.
> > 
> I fully agree.

Sure, will put the the commit text ? Else, is it fine to put in as a
code comment ?

> 
> And in fact, this is actually quite a big patch, and does (although
> it
> touches only a few files) a bunch of different things (new
> functionalities, improved comments, etc).
> 
> So, Jan, would it be ok for this thing that Praveen is trying to do,
> to
> be a series, with one patch for each original Linux commit? I think,
> if
> it were me doing this, that would be how I'd do it.
> 
> Otherwise it is e.g. hard to understand why ...
> > 
> > 
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Praveen Kumar <kpraveen.lkml@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > >  xen/common/rbtree.c                | 748
> > > +++++++++++++++++++++++++------------
> > >  xen/include/xen/compiler.h         |  60 +++
> > >  xen/include/xen/rbtree.h           | 120 ++++--
> > >  xen/include/xen/rbtree_augmented.h | 283 ++++++++++++++
> > 
> > ... namely this last (new) header (and what it provides) is needed
> > at all.
> > 
> Indeed. And in fact, for our original purpose (which is to use rb-
> trees 
> instead of linked lists for Credit2's runqueues), I don't think we
> actually need the augmented variant.

Ok. I will go through what all changes are incorporated with augmented
variant and not include them ( Need to check with the versions. )
> 
> Praveen, as we agreed on IRC, it is ok to send this patch (which I
> think should have been a patch series) first, but stating why you are
> actually doing this (i.e., a few words on the original purpose I'm
> mentioning above), is really useful, to set the context, and should
> be
> there (in the cover letter or a follow up email).
> 
Dario, I sent in initial patch as a follow up email, but my bad didn't
send the same while resending the patch. Will take care of the same in
future patches.

> Also, do Cc me please (in addition to what get_maintainers.pl
> says). :-)
> 

Sure will add you in Cc. Thanks.

> Regards,
> Dario

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel