On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 05:31:18PM -0600, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 12/19/2017 02:45 AM, Peter Xu wrote:
>
> Grammar in the subject:
>
> s/monitor dedicate/a dedicated monitor/
>
> > Create one IOThread for the monitors, prepared to handle all the
> > input/output IOs using existing iothread framework.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Peter Xu <pet...@redhat.com>
> > ---
> > monitor.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 29 insertions(+)
> >
>
> > @@ -207,6 +208,11 @@ struct Monitor {
> > QTAILQ_ENTRY(Monitor) entry;
> > };
> >
> > +/* Let's add monitor global variables to this struct. */
>
> Is this comment a placeholder for future additions in later patches of
> the series? If so, a temporary TODO or FIXME might make it easier to
> track that this patch is part of a series; if not, you could delete the
> comment altogether.
mon_iothread is the first element of struct already so IMHO it's not
really a TODO. The series will add some more things inside though
(and hoping that it can be a good place to unify global monitor stuff
in the future). Actually the comment is a suggestion from Stefan and
either with/without it works for me.
>
> > +static struct {
> > + IOThread *mon_iothread;
> > +} mon_global;
> > +
>
> Up to you what to do about the comment; tweaking it (or leaving it
> unchanged) is not a semantic change, so I'm fine with:
>
> Reviewed-by: Eric Blake <ebl...@redhat.com>
So I'm taking the R-b if you won't disagree and keep everything
untouched. Thanks,
--
Peter Xu
