On Wed, Jul 20, 2022 at 10:40:03AM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote: > Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Yes, someone might forget to update the state type but my experience > > with this code is that it's a lot easier to spot "this is writing new > > state, did it update the state type?" than "this is writing new state, > > did it call the helper that implicitly updates the state type or the > > other one?". > My experience in maintaining the KVM code is that the least state > leaks outside of this sort of helpers, the least problematic they > are. I'd rather have multiple helpers that have different *documented* > behaviours than expecting the random hacker to know (or in this case, > *guess*) when or not to add some extra state-twiddling. It also makes > the code far more readable because it is self-contained. > If this series is supposed to help making things more maintainable, > then this is one way to do it. There's nothing self contained going on, and based on what the users are doing it isn't at all obvious to me that taking a copy of the data in another format should be part of the same operation as deciding which format should be the live data. I'm all for helpers but between that and the direct awareness the users already need to have of what's going on I'm just not seeing that a combined convert and make active operation is jumping out as something that should be a helper.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
