On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 10:22:29 +0100, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
> On Mon, 2018-02-19 at 07:28 +0100, Peter Krempa wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 17:28:04 +0100, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
> > > We will rewrite pretty much every single line of this function
> > > over the course of the next several commits, and starting from
> > > a clean slate rather than replacing it bit by bit makes the
> > > resulting diffs unmeasurably easier to read and understand,
> > > and you need fewer of them to boot. Trust me, I tried the other
> > > approach first :)
> >
> > Will this remove any checks during the series? If yes, then you probably
> > should at first rename this function and add a almost-empty wrapper then
> > add new code to the wrapper and delete the renamed function at the end.
>
> No, if anything it *adds* a bunch of checks :)
Well, I meant that after applying this patch a bunch of checks will
vanish until you add them in the next patches, which I don't think we
should do.
>
> Renaming the function won't work because then the compiler will
> complain about it being unused. Unless you meant something like
>
> /* Delete once done */
> ValidateControllerPCIOld() {
> /* Existing checks here */
> }
>
> ValidateControllerPCI() {
> /* New checks here */
>
> /* Delete once done */
> ValidateControllerPCIOld();
> }
>
> which could actually do the trick.
I meant this flow obviously, so that the checks are kept until
fixed/reimplemented.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
