[PATCH] Tidy CPU time reporting, add DPC and interrupt

[Ray Hinchliffe (RH)]

I can see why for some changes it's appropriate to have separate patches. In
this case I feel the general cleanup of the code and the fixes would be much
easier when done all at once.  Doing it this way would be less work for both
of us and I feel if you just looked at the new code block you would see
this. To make this easy I have attached "The-Final-Code.txt".

I have attached the patch that does this in the hope sanity prevails. This
function has been wonky for years so let's just fix it once and for all!

Has there ever been a patch that fixed a number of similar but slightly
different issues? Why was that allowed?

If I think a section of code is a "mess" and wish to clean it up is there a
procedure I should follow?

I am expecting you to reject this request, but maybe you will surprise me.

If you will not accept this then I guess I will start just do a patch to fix
DPC and Interrupt reporting as that is all I need. This was my initial
intent and I started doing just that, but spotted the other bugs so fixed
them.

Regards,
Ray

-----Original Message-----
From: Alexandre Julliard [mailto:julliard at winehq.org] 
Sent: 19 April 2011 14:21
To: Ray Hinchliffe (RH)
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix SystemProcessorPerformanceInformation to include
DPC and Interrupt times

"Ray Hinchliffe (RH)" <ray at rh-software.com> writes:

> OK about SYSTEM_PROCESSOR_PERFORMANCE_INFORMATION? Would local definitions
> of the form #define DpcTime Reserved1[0] be OK?

Probably not.

> Do you really have to have independent 4 patches before you will accept
these
> fixes?

Yes.

-- 
Alexandre Julliard
julliard at winehq.org