On 09/08/19 03:35, Paul Walmsley wrote: > On Thu, 8 Aug 2019, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > >> However, for Linux releases after 5.4 I would rather get pull requests >> for arch/riscv/kvm from Anup and Atish without involving the RISC-V >> tree. Of course, they or I will ask for your ack, or for a topic >> branch, on the occasion that something touches files outside their >> maintainership area. This is how things are already being handled for >> ARM, POWER and s390 and it allows me to handle conflicts in common KVM >> files before they reach Linus; these are more common than conflicts in >> arch files. If you have further questions on git and maintenance >> workflows, just ask! > > In principle, that's fine with me, as long as the arch/riscv maintainers > and mailing lists are kept in the loop. We already do something similar > to this for the RISC-V BPF JIT. However, I'd like this to be explicitly > documented in the MAINTAINERS file, as it is for BPF. It looks like it > isn't for ARM, POWER, or S390, either looking at MAINTAINERS or > spot-checking scripts/get_maintainer.pl: > > $ scripts/get_maintainer.pl -f arch/s390/kvm/interrupt.c > Christian Borntraeger <[email protected]> (supporter:KERNEL VIRTUAL > MACHINE for s390 (KVM/s390)) > Janosch Frank <[email protected]> (supporter:KERNEL VIRTUAL MACHINE for > s390 (KVM/s390)) > David Hildenbrand <[email protected]> (reviewer:KERNEL VIRTUAL MACHINE for > s390 (KVM/s390)) > Cornelia Huck <[email protected]> (reviewer:KERNEL VIRTUAL MACHINE for s390 > (KVM/s390)) > Heiko Carstens <[email protected]> (supporter:S390) > Vasily Gorbik <[email protected]> (supporter:S390) > [email protected] (open list:KERNEL VIRTUAL MACHINE for s390 > (KVM/s390)) > [email protected] (open list) > $ > > Would you be willing to send a MAINTAINERS patch to formalize this > practice?
Ah, I see, in the MAINTAINERS entry KERNEL VIRTUAL MACHINE FOR RISC-V (KVM/riscv) M: Anup Patel <[email protected]> R: Atish Patra <[email protected]> L: [email protected] T: git git://github.com/avpatel/linux.git S: Maintained F: arch/riscv/include/uapi/asm/kvm* F: arch/riscv/include/asm/kvm* F: arch/riscv/kvm/ the L here should be [email protected]. arch/riscv/kvm/ files would still match RISC-V ARCHITECTURE and therefore [email protected] would be CCed. Unlike other subsystems, for KVM I ask the submaintainers to include the patches in their pull requests, which is why you saw no kvm@vger entry for KVM/s390. However, it's probably a good idea to add it and do the same for RISC-V. Is that what you meant? Paolo
