Il 18/07/2013 14:07, Michael R. Hines ha scritto: > On 07/18/2013 03:30 AM, Marcel Apfelbaum wrote: >> On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 12:48 -0400, mrhi...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote: >>> From: "Michael R. Hines" <mrhi...@us.ibm.com> >>> >>> Code that does need to be visible is kept >>> well contained inside this file and this is the only >>> new additional file to the entire patch. >>> >>> This file includes the entire protocol and interfaces >>> required to perform RDMA migration. >>> >>> Also, the configure and Makefile modifications to link >>> this file are included. >>> >>> Full documentation is in docs/rdma.txt >>> >> This patch is too big (in my opinion). >> I would split it into at least 3 patches: >> 1. Generic RDMA code (this part can be reused by everyone who will >> need RDMA in the future) >> 2. RDMA transfer protocol (separating this will give us possibility >> for optimization without touching the rest of the code) >> 3. Migration related code >> > > Don't let the "v3" mislead you =). The patch actually *used* to look > just like what > you described (3 different ones), but after more than a dozen reviews > since January > I was told to join all the code into a single file by the reviewers.
Yeah, I guess I owe some explanation to Marcel (who is not RDMA-impaired at all). Because the reviewers (me especially) did not know much about RDMA, we initially concentrated on having the right interfaces between migration-rdma.c and the migration core. Once we had something that core developers considered to be the "right" interfaces, Michael's original split in 1/2/3 didn't make much sense anymore, so in the end it was easier to just merge everything in a single patch and treat it almost as a black box. Having generic RDMA code in a separate file would be a nice thing, but I don't think it's absolutely necessary in order to merge this code (which I would like to have in 1.6). We have already done "chainsaw" passes on files in the past, at this point I prefer "release early, release often". Paolo
