From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B951B2036D for ; Sun, 19 Nov 2017 02:20:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751003AbdKSCUB (ORCPT ); Sat, 18 Nov 2017 21:20:01 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:63569 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750972AbdKSCUA (ORCPT ); Sat, 18 Nov 2017 21:20:00 -0500 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AEE67A318A; Sat, 18 Nov 2017 21:19:59 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=2EkRv6XErhpxA4aSCXtWG9IjVhM=; b=htjQ3n EX2as3Q0l6Jk6Ifx8siyAEiSrsknEuuFCYs4B+Wcm1Ra5MtwOZn4hOjMwpK8kNWF B3996I/5kudJqwB/Dn7xdFdgwCjFbfx3ZFKEJjpRjhxqDrC/8MzCFbzzjxDePDrC 72SatFQRQkFNC31KaycXNypVfCwOc9l66LfBM= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=ZGc4MADZxZaF3EMkrQr6WrmWBfN797rk JGaQFz1M/l2VDILB5ba1yEHd6LLDC4+xTVMr4HHKWd54ery8mTrGJuz9Y8Yt0a+M nfZp5ytChw3d07hvidy88Aht5leUXXIRXZTIWGmmF4ZWR2QUaV1jI2tDsylSM6nw peAxP1UM93c= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5414A3189; Sat, 18 Nov 2017 21:19:59 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [104.132.0.95]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1D62BA3187; Sat, 18 Nov 2017 21:19:59 -0500 (EST) From: Junio C Hamano To: gennady.kupava@gmail.com Cc: git , Gennady Kupava Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Simplify tracing code by removing trace key normalization concept References: <20171117221631.x2xqeeqmf5xob3yv@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20171119004247.22792-1-gennady.kupava@gmail.com> Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2017 11:19:57 +0900 In-Reply-To: <20171119004247.22792-1-gennady.kupava@gmail.com> (gennady kupava's message of "Sun, 19 Nov 2017 00:42:46 +0000") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.2.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 243D739A-CCD0-11E7-848B-575F0C78B957-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org gennady.kupava@gmail.com writes: > Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Simplify tracing code by removing trace key normalization concept The usual style comment on the subject applies here. > From: Gennady Kupava > > - to implement efficient traces with normalization, normalization > implementation should be moved to header. as it seems better to not > overload header file with this normalization logic, suggestion is > just to remove it > - different macro exist specifically to handle traces with default key > - there is no use of normalization in current code > - it could be reintroduced if necessary I cannot quite tell what it is trying to achive to make it a bulleted list. It's not like four things at the same conceptual level is enumerated; instead it just has four sentences that talk about random things. More importantly, I am not sure I understand what these sentences are trying to say. "Should be moved to header"---so? Does that move something from the source to the header? It seems to me that the patch removes a helper function from trace.c but does not add anything to the header. Or am I wasting everybody's time by commenting on a stale comment that used to describe an ancient iteration of this code? Puzzled.