[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [Qemu-commits] [COMMIT f80f9ec] Convert machine reg
From: |
Glauber Costa |
Subject: |
Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [Qemu-commits] [COMMIT f80f9ec] Convert machine registration to use module initfunctions |
Date: |
Thu, 21 May 2009 22:49:57 -0300 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) |
On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 08:34:48PM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> Glauber Costa wrote:
>> On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 11:36:01PM +0100, Paul Brook wrote:
>>
>>>> From: Anthony Liguori <address@hidden>
>>>>
>>>> This cleans up quite a lot of #ifdefs, extern variables, and other
>>>> ugliness.
>>>>
>>> This changes the default for at least the ARM target, which I
>>> consider to be a bug. Worse than that, the default is now arbitrary
>>> and depends on unspecified toolchain implementation details.
>>>
>> How about we start sending patches to the list? Then this kind of thing can
>> be avoided.
>>
>
> It doesn't magically solve the problem. I post most patches and still
> regressions slip in. I review every patch I commit and still
> regressions slip in. People are imperfect.
true.
>
> The best way to prevent regressions is to have an automated test suite
> that everyone can use to validate that a series of patches doesn't break
> things.
true...
>
>> Note that although at first there is nothing wrong with just messing around
>> with
>> the devel repository, this kind of thing breaks bisectability of the
>> tree, which is kind of a pain.
>>
>
> You can always --skip. I understand your point. In this case, the
> patch was very large and mostly mechanical. There was a design flaw but
> I didn't expect to get much useful feedback because of the shear amount
> of things it touched.
however, for a lot of patches that recently went in, there were discussions
_after_ the patch made its way to the repository. The discussions help,
everybody
does that. Giving people a chance to stand up and raise valid points before
a change is made to the repository is at the very least, a polite attitude to be
taken. And although I agree with you that it does not solve all problems, it
really does help improving the situation by a huge leap.
- [Qemu-devel] Re: [Qemu-commits] [COMMIT f80f9ec] Convert machine registration to use module initfunctions, Paul Brook, 2009/05/21
- Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [Qemu-commits] [COMMIT f80f9ec] Convert machine registration to use module initfunctions, Glauber Costa, 2009/05/21
- Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [Qemu-commits] [COMMIT f80f9ec] Convert machine registration to use module initfunctions, Anthony Liguori, 2009/05/21
- autotest (was Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [Qemu-commits] [COMMIT f80f9ec] Convert machine registration to use module initfunctions), Dor Laor, 2009/05/23
- Re: autotest (was Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [Qemu-commits] [COMMIT f80f9ec] Convert machine registration to use module initfunctions), Anthony Liguori, 2009/05/24
- Re: autotest (was Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [Qemu-commits] [COMMIT f80f9ec] Convert machine registration to use module initfunctions), Avi Kivity, 2009/05/24
- Re: autotest (was Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [Qemu-commits] [COMMIT f80f9ec] Convert machine registration to use module initfunctions), Anthony Liguori, 2009/05/26
- Re: autotest (was Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [Qemu-commits] [COMMIT f80f9ec] Convert machine registration to use module initfunctions), Dor Laor, 2009/05/26
- Re: autotest (was Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [Qemu-commits] [COMMIT f80f9ec] Convert machine registration to use module initfunctions), Anthony Liguori, 2009/05/26
- Re: autotest (was Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [Qemu-commits] [COMMIT f80f9ec] Convert machine registration to use module initfunctions), Dor Laor, 2009/05/26
- Re: autotest (was Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [Qemu-commits] [COMMIT f80f9ec] Convert machine registration to use module initfunctions), Avi Kivity, 2009/05/26
[Qemu-devel] Re: [Qemu-commits] [COMMIT f80f9ec] Convert machine registration to use module initfunctions, Anthony Liguori, 2009/05/21