On Mon, Jul 05, 2021 at 09:56:18AM +0200, Igor Mammedov wrote: > On Fri, 2 Jul 2021 10:47:20 -0400 > "Michael S. Tsirkin" <m...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > On Fri, Jun 25, 2021 at 05:17:24AM -0400, Igor Mammedov wrote: > > > Highlights: > > > * drop pointer arithmetic in ACPI tables code > > > * use endian agnostic API > > > * simplifies review of tables. /in most cases just line by line > > > comparision with spec/ > > > > > > A hue amount of work, thank you! > > To make it easier to merge, how about splitting it up a bit? > > E.g. I think first 10-11 patches make sense on their own, right? > > I think you've meant 01-11 patches, and answer is yes, it's in-depended > of actual ACPI refactoring as was mentioned is cover letter, see below. > > [...] > > > > > > Series also includes optional qtest patches that add missing acpi > > > tests for tables that I'm touching to verify conversion changes. > > > That includes an alternative build time based impl. of > > > qtest_has_accel() API. So if we start bike-shedding this qtest_has_accel() > > > we can safely drop all tests included, till the time discussion settles > > > and some form of a qtest_has_accel() is merged, at which point I'd respin > > > depended tests. > [...] > > it's ok to split tests into a separate series if that's what you prefer.
Let's start with a smaller series that still makes sense. I'll merge that we'll look at the next chunk. -- MST
