Re: [Xen-devel] [Xen-devel[PATCH Resend v2] xen: common: rbtree: ported updates from linux tree

[Praveen Kumar <kpraveen.lkml@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, 2017-06-01 at 09:43 +0200, Dario Faggioli wrote:
> On Thu, 2017-06-01 at 01:26 -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > 
> > > 
> > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > On 31.05.17 at 23:20, <kpraveen.lkml@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > I have not imported augmented and rcu rbtree functionality to the
> > > xen tree,
> > > as there was no specific requirement for current planned
> > > implementation.
> > > 
> > Bug fixes and improvements to existing code are clearly welcome
> > and need no further rationale provided here. Having looked only
> > over the titles so far I see two patches which look to add new
> > functionality (13 and 17). 
> > 
> I also have only quickly skimmed through the series for now.
> 
> Indeed 17 adds stuff which I suspect we may not need, and in any
> case,
> I don't think it belongs in this series.
> 
> If you really need those iterators when actually using rb-tree,
> you'll
> add the patch at that time.
> 
> 13, despite its own (poor, I agree) subject line, is actually doing
> some decent refactoring of the code, so I'd keep it:
> <<Add __rb_change_child() as an inline helper function to replace
> code 
> that would otherwise be duplicated 4 times in the source.>>
> 

Dario,

For the commits not ported from Linux tree, I will share the
information in updated patch ( in similar way what I did by adding a
cover letter ).

Also, as suggested Will remove the patch 17 for now, and validate
others too.

Thanks once again for providing your comment.

Regards,

~Praveen.

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