Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 19 Jun 2023 12:16:44 -0700 | From | "H. Peter Anvin" <> | Subject | RE: [PATCH v8 01/33] x86/traps: let common interrupt() handle IRQ MOVE CLEANUP VECTOR |
| |
On June 19, 2023 11:47:08 AM PDT, "Li, Xin3" <xin3.li@intel.com> wrote: >> > To me it's better to keep the changes in one patch, thus the >> > differences are more obvious. >> >> The rename to vector_schedule_cleanup() can be obviously done first. > >Okay, it's a bit wired to me to rename before any actual code logic change. >
Weird or not, that's the established practice.
However, if you think about it, it makes sense: that way your code logic patch doesn't contain a bunch of names which will almost immediately be outdated. That is *really* confusing when you are going back through the git history, for example.
>> >> > We need a second patch to do vector cleanup in lapic_offline() in case >> > the vector cleanup timer has not expired. >> >> Right. I was lazy and just put a WARN_ON() there under the assumption that you >> will figure it out. > >I see that, as your changes to lapic_offline() are completely new. > >> But a second patch? >> >> We don't switch things over into a broken state first and then fix it up afterwards. > >Make sense! >
| |