>>> "Xu, Quan" <quan...@intel.com> 05/26/16 12:38 PM >>> >On May 25, 2016 4:30 PM, Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com> wrote: >> The patch getting too large is easy to deal with: Split it at a reasonable >> boundary. > >If I follow the below rule, I need to merge most of patches into this one. I >can't find a reasonable boundary.
As before, boundaries are pretty easy to set: Just change one function at a time, or when two or a few are very closely related, do the changes together. But try to avoid changing ones in the same patch that call each other (unless of course there's some sort of recursion). But yes, as you say in the other reply, a big patch may not be a problem as long as it remains reasonably understandable (e.g. many small hunks are usually fine, but a single or a few hunks changing dozens or even hundreds of lines in one go are usually hard to review). >I recall your suggestion: top one first, then low level one.. >I am better not to make this patch as a first one, as this is really a low >level one. >Then, I need to change condition from 'if ( !rc )' to ' if ( rc < 0 )' in my >series. (but if this series would be merged together, I don't need to think >about it.) >Does it make sense? I'm afraid I'm lacking context. Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
