[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2] target/i386: Fixes to the check missing feat

From: Eric Blake
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2] target/i386: Fixes to the check missing features routine
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2018 11:15:32 -0600
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.3.1

On 12/11/18 10:28 AM, Wainer dos Santos Moschetta wrote:
The x86_cpu_class_check_missing_features() returns a list
of unavailable features compared to the host CPU. Currently it may
return empty strings for unnamed features as well as duplicated

For example, the qmp "query-cpu-definitions" below shows one empty
string and repeated "mpx" entries:

Signed-off-by: Wainer dos Santos Moschetta <address@hidden>
Reviewed-by: Eduardo Habkost <address@hidden>
Reviewed-by: Eric Blake <address@hidden>

Careful. While I spotted typos in v1,...

Reviewed-by: Caio Carrara <address@hidden>
  * Fixed typos. [eblake]

...and you indeed addressed them, me pointing out typos does not imply that I reviewed the patch for correctness. In fact, I specifically did NOT give my R-by: tag to v1, because I'm not (yet?) familiar enough with the tests/acceptance/ framework to state that I have fully reviewed the patch for correctness; instead, I'm comfortable relying on the reviews of others (and I am again intentionally not giving R-by to v2).

Also, when posting a v2, you should include the R-by actually given to v1 only if the patch is roughly the same as the original. Fixing minor issues that a reviewer pointed out, or doing obvious rebasing to changes applied earlier in the series or on upstream git, but where the algorithm of the patch itself did not change, is okay for keeping R-b (so if I _had_ given R-b, and your spelling changes were the only difference, then keeping my R-b would make sense); but where the patch is fundamentally different, such as:

 * Removed unwanted manual test case. [ccarrara, ehabkost]
 * Not passing 'accel=kvm' on test's VM. [ehabkost]

then omitting ALL R-by tags, in order to ensure that reviewers check that the new patch is still correct, is a wiser course of action. Yes, this is more of a rule of thumb, and there are cases where keeping or dropping R-b is more of an art form than an exact science; but hopefully this helps you understand how the tag can be useful for iterative reviews.

Eric Blake, Principal Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc.           +1-919-301-3266
Virtualization:  qemu.org | libvirt.org

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]