06.02.2019 21:14, Eric Blake wrote: > On 2/6/19 12:09 PM, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote: >> 06.02.2019 20:32, Eric Blake wrote: >>> On 2/6/19 10:53 AM, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote: >>>> Use new qemu_iovec_init_buf() instead of >>>> qemu_iovec_init_external( ... , 1), which simplifies the code. >>> >>> Did you just do a manual search for candidate callers? >>> >>> As you said in the cover letter, there are other files that can benefit >>> as well; are you planning on making v3 of the series longer? >> >> git grep qemu_iovec_init_external | grep 1 >> >> shows a lot of, exactly 34 after io.c already updated. >> They are in different subsystems, so I think it should be simpler to push >> this >> one as a precedent and example, and then send separate patches (or series) >> per-maintainer. > > Most are block related, so getting it in through the block maintainers > is probably the easiest - but you ARE right that one patch per one or > two files or two is going to be smartest (otherwise, it gets too big). > >> >> hm, in other words: >> # git grep -l 'qemu_iovec_init_external.*1' >> block/backup.c >> block/block-backend.c >> block/commit.c >> block/parallels.c >> block/qcow.c >> block/qcow2.c >> block/qed-table.c >> block/qed.c >> block/stream.c >> block/vmdk.c >> hw/ide/atapi.c >> hw/ide/core.c >> hw/scsi/scsi-disk.c >> migration/block.c >> qemu-img.c >> tests/test-bdrv-drain.c > > I'd group qed-table.c and qed.c; and the two hw/ide/ files; resulting in > 14 more patches to go. >
So, you, think better is to make one common patch set? Ok, I'll do (hmm or start doing) it tomorrow as v3 if no other opinions. -- Best regards, Vladimir
