>>> On 22.02.16 at 11:29, wrote:
> On 22/02/16 10:02, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 19.02.16 at 17:18, wrote:
>>> On 19/02/16 14:44, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> On 18.02.16 at 19:03, wrote:
> It is not obvious what this code is doing. Most of it dates from
> 2007/2008,
> and there hav
On 22/02/16 10:02, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 19.02.16 at 17:18, wrote:
>> On 19/02/16 14:44, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 18.02.16 at 19:03, wrote:
It is not obvious what this code is doing. Most of it dates from
2007/2008,
and there have been substantial changes in Xen's memory
>>> On 19.02.16 at 17:18, wrote:
> On 19/02/16 14:44, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 18.02.16 at 19:03, wrote:
>>> It is not obvious what this code is doing. Most of it dates from 2007/2008,
>>> and there have been substantial changes in Xen's memory handling since then.
>> Deleting code which isn'
On 19/02/16 14:44, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 18.02.16 at 19:03, wrote:
>> It is not obvious what this code is doing. Most of it dates from 2007/2008,
>> and there have been substantial changes in Xen's memory handling since then.
> Deleting code which isn't understood what it is or was once used
>>> On 18.02.16 at 19:03, wrote:
> It is not obvious what this code is doing. Most of it dates from 2007/2008,
> and there have been substantial changes in Xen's memory handling since then.
Deleting code which isn't understood what it is or was once used
for is sub-optimal.
> It was previously
