On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 8:33 AM, Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com> wrote: >>>> On 24.06.15 at 09:26, <tiejun.c...@intel.com> wrote: >>> This would need to go into patch 2; I wonder whether folding that >> >> Yes. >> >>> and this one wouldn't be warranted, avoiding the former adding >> >> Are you saying to fold patch #2 and patch #3? But shouldn't we always >> define a new and then use that in practice subsequently? Even with two >> patches, respectively. > > It's a matter of taste to some degree. Unless patches are really > involved, I prefer them not to add dead code. Apart from > eliminating the case of the code remaining dead (perhaps for > extended periods of time) if only parts of a series get applied, it > also generally helps review if one can see the consumer of a > newly added function right away.
FWIW I was thinking the same thing as I was looking at these two patches. -George _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
