On Mon, 2011-08-29 at 13:36 +0100, Daniel Castro wrote:
On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 1:15 AM, Kevin O'Connor kevin@koconnor.net wrote:
On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 10:22:43AM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
On Tue, 2011-08-23 at 21:10 -0400, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
It looks to me like this patch series adds capabilities that a later patch series will use. The patch series itself looks okay to me (though, I do find the multiple copyright statements in the middle of xen.h confusing).
That is a consequence of mashing bits of multiple Xen public headers into a single xen.h. We could fracture it into xen/*.h instead if that would be preferable?
How about just moving all the copyright notices next to the license text.
I think it is important to be able to trace the header to a specific file in the xen headers. It will make it easier to read and understand.
That's certainly a good argument for keeping the comments which indicate which file each definition came from. I'm not 100% sure of the legal implications but I expect we could amalgamate all the copywrite statements underneath the license statement, that would leave just a single line comment at the head of each "file". e.g. instead of: /****************************************************************************** * arch-x86/xen.h * * Guest OS interface to x86 Xen. * * Copyright (c) 2004-2006, K A Fraser */
It could be the much less intrusive:
/* arch-x86/xen.h: Guest OS interface to x86 Xen */
and the Copyright line would be in the original license header comment with far less duplication (since many of them are the same).
Ian.
-
Ian Campbell