From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1751353AbcGMVMN (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Wed, 13 Jul 2016 17:12:13 -0400
Received: from www.linutronix.de ([62.245.132.108]:41481 "EHLO
	Galois.linutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1750765AbcGMVMJ (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 13 Jul 2016 17:12:09 -0400
Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 23:09:31 +0200 (CEST)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: "Yu, Fenghua" <fenghua.yu@intel.com>
cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, "Anvin, H Peter" <h.peter.anvin@intel.com>,
        "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>, Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>,
        David Carrillo-Cisneros <davidcc@google.com>,
        "Shankar, Ravi V" <ravi.v.shankar@intel.com>,
        Vikas Shivappa <vikas.shivappa@linux.intel.com>,
        "Prakhya, Sai Praneeth" <sai.praneeth.prakhya@intel.com>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, x86 <x86@kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 08/32] Define CONFIG_INTEL_RDT
In-Reply-To: <3E5A0FA7E9CA944F9D5414FEC6C712205DFD4AB3@ORSMSX106.amr.corp.intel.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1607132303580.4083@nanos>
References: <1468371785-53231-1-git-send-email-fenghua.yu@intel.com> <1468371785-53231-9-git-send-email-fenghua.yu@intel.com> <alpine.DEB.2.11.1607131223020.4083@nanos> <3E5A0FA7E9CA944F9D5414FEC6C712205DFD4AB3@ORSMSX106.amr.corp.intel.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.11 (DEB 23 2013-08-11)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Linutronix-Spam-Score: -1.0
X-Linutronix-Spam-Level: -
X-Linutronix-Spam-Status: No , -1.0 points, 5.0 required,  ALL_TRUSTED=-1,SHORTCIRCUIT=-0.0001
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Wed, 13 Jul 2016, Yu, Fenghua wrote:
> Here is why this patch behaves like this:
> 
> This patch and actually first 12 patches are directly from last year's
> cgroup base CAT patch series. The last year's patch series had gone 16
> versions already. Because the first 12 patches have been reviewed many
> times, we keep them untouched (except removing cgroup code in patch 8 and
> some unused cdp code in patch 11) and release other patches on top of the
> first 12 patches.

Which is not making the review any simpler. In order to understand the
modifications I have to go back and page in the original stuff from last year
once again. So I have to read the original patch first to understand the
modifications and then get the overall picture of the new stuff. Please fold
stuff back to the proper places so I can start reviewing this thing under the
new design idea instead of twisting my brain around two designs.
 
> I fully agree this patch should be split if we want to have a good overall
> patch series.

Good.

Thanks,

	tglx