Re: [libvirt] [PATCH 41/41] Move CMT feature filtering to QEMU driver

On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 18:06:36 -0400, John Ferlan wrote: > > > On 08/12/2016 09:33 AM, Jiri Denemark wrote: >> It really doesn't belong to the generic CPU driver. >> >> Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar(a)redhat.com&gt; >> --- >> src/cpu/cpu_x86.c | 16 ++-------------- >> src/qemu/qemu_capabilities.c | 16 +++++++++++++++- >> 2 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) >> > > Hmm... interesting is this something that the online perf add more stats > will need to also adjust, see (8/8): > > http://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2016-August/msg00209.html > > It doesn't seem so, but since I recognized the acronyms I figured I'd > check... The support for perf events is advertised by CMT CPU feature (and a few others), but otherwise the parts of our code dealing with CPU features and perf events are unrelated. There's no need to adjust anything in the perf events code. > So here we are again at a summary - if I didn't comment on something > consider it an implicit ACK. > > There's a couple of reviews that are simple and ACK'able - I think > they're obvious. > > However, there's also a couple where I'm just looking for information. I > have no reason to not ACK, just wanted some clarity. I don't necessarily > need to see a whole new series. I think it just the interaction noted > in patch 40, 35, and 26 (update and compare callbacks). So after my replies to your comments, do you want me to resend any patches from the series? I think the best option is to resend them all and mark all unchanged patches so that reviewers do not need to look at them again, but it's going to be a series of 45 patches.

Anyway, thanks for the review, I can imagine going through so many patches to the ugly CPU code was not easy. But I think the code is going to get better thanks to the patches :-) Jirka