Re: [PATCH 0/3] hw/ppc: reorg PowerPC RAS code for better maintainability

Sourabh Jain <[email protected]>
Newsgroups org.nongnu.qemu-devel
Message-ID <[email protected]>

On 15/07/26 20:22, Harsh Prateek Bora wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Jul, 2026, 8: 10 pm Vaibhav Jain, 
> <vaibhav@ linux. ibm. com> wrote: Hi Shivang, Thanks for the patches. 
> My review comments below: Shivang Upadhyay <shivangu@ linux. ibm. com> 
> writes: > Extracting RAS related code from spapr_rtas. c,
> 
>
>
> On Wed, 15 Jul, 2026, 8:10 pm Vaibhav Jain, <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>     Hi Shivang,
>
>     Thanks for the patches. My review comments below:
>
>     Shivang Upadhyay <[email protected]> writes:
>
>     > Extracting RAS related code from spapr_rtas.c, to a newly
>     created spapr_rtas_ras.c
>     > and carving out a MAINTAINERS entry dedicated to PowerPC RAS.
>     This will cover RAS
>     > related functionalities for PowerPC platforms.
>     For a refactor-only change, this patch is adding 44 new lines to the
>     codebase which feels a bit heavy.
>
>     Just moving code from one file to a new file will reset the git blame
>     history of the code making future reviews difficult.
>
>     Such movement also makes code optimization difficult for compiler.
>
>     IMHO such code movement should only be done when:
>
>     * Its accompanied with patches for adding or fixing a functionality.
>     Or
>     * It clearly improves performance
>     Or
>     * Results in significant reduction in LOC
>
>     Since these patches doesnt seem to fit to any of the above criteria I
>     suggest you to reconsider these patches.
>
>
> I think the goal here is to ensure right people get notified to review 
> RAS related code changes. Other option would be to keep entire 
> spapr_rtas.c file listed under RAS and let it have non RAS related 
> code also and do the split later when it's bloated enough to be 
> considered for split. Open to suggestions.
>
> Aditya, Sourabh, thoughts?

Yes, I think we can drop the code rearrangement done in 1/3 for now. 
And, as you said,
to bring the right people into the review, we can still consider the 2nd 
and 3rd patches.


- Sourabh Jain

>
>
>
>     >
>     > Also adding myself as a reviewer, to help share the review workload.
>     >
>     Thanks for volunteering as a reviwer for this code. Having more help
>     with reviews is always good :-)
>
>     > Shivang Upadhyay (3):
>     >   hw/ppc: move RAS-specific RTAS handlers to spapr_rtas_ras.c
>     >   MAINTAINERS: add dedicated PowerPC RAS section
>     >   MAINTAINERS: add self as reviewer for PowerPC RAS
>     >
>     >  MAINTAINERS             |  33 +++---
>     >  hw/ppc/meson.build      |   1 +
>     >  hw/ppc/spapr_rtas.c     | 189 --------------------------------
>     >  hw/ppc/spapr_rtas_ras.c | 232
>     ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>     >  4 files changed, 249 insertions(+), 206 deletions(-)
>     >  create mode 100644 hw/ppc/spapr_rtas_ras.c
>     >
>     > --
>     > 2.54.0
>     >
>     >
>
>     -- 
>     Cheers
>     ~ Vaibhav
>
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.