[PATCH] D14854: [PGO] runtime/instrumentation code restructuring

[Sean Silva via llvm-commits]

I don't think there is disagreement about the direction you're going with
this (having a single point of truth for these definitions), and 1-7 seem
to categorize as "obvious" in view of that direction, so feel free to
commit (as incremental patches, of course).

Any issues in small patches like this can be figured out in post-commit
(i.e. as opposed to doing pre-commit review on phabricator) as long as
there is agreement about the general direction. The major need for
pre-commit review is patches that are starting in a new direction (for
major changes, RFC on llvm-dev is appropriate) and for especially large
patches that introduce significant new functionality. (there is some more
information here:
http://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html#incremental-development )

On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 1:39 PM, Xinliang David Li <davidxl at google.com>
wrote:

> Those changes are highly related and most of the changes are documentation
> and in one file only. I think it is better to review the changes in one
> piece (for better context).
>
> Later I can of course commit the reviewed changes in smaller pieces
> (logically just two of them).
>
> thanks,
>
> David
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 7:28 PM, Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> silvas added a subscriber: silvas.
>> silvas requested changes to this revision.
>> silvas added a reviewer: silvas.
>> silvas added a comment.
>> This revision now requires changes to proceed.
>>
>> Your 1-7 are natural separate patches, so please split this patch up.
>>
>>
>> http://reviews.llvm.org/D14854
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/attachments/20151120/2d51d4c0/attachment.html>