Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86: Change trap definitions to enumerated values

[David Sharp]

Well, these two patches were one patch originally, and we broke it up
before sending it to you, but we made a couple mistakes:

- missed that there were still tracepoints in this patch (it's a long,
repetitive patch).
- over-estimated the resistance to this patch, and under-estimated
resistance to the tracepoint patch, so put the tracepoint patch first.

We're learning...

On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 3:54 PM, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-05-03 at 15:41 -0700, Michael Rubin wrote:
>> On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 12:00 PM, Vaibhav Nagarnaik
>> <vnagarnaik@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > Would it make better sense to separate this patch into 2 patches, the first
>> > one replacing the numbers to enums and the second one adding the tracepoints?
>>
>> Yes please do that.
>> Each patch should stand on its own with one simple purpose if possible.
>
> Agreed. Don't break up patches just because of size, but instead with
> purpose. Usually this breaks up large patches as you want to build up
> something, piece by piece, where each piece has a specific, easy to
> understand goal.
>
> This is actually what is taking me so long to get my ftrace rewrite out.
> Not the actual work, but coming up with a way to break up that work in
> logical steps, that makes it easy to understand and review.
>
> -- Steve
>
>
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/