On Fri, Oct 10, 2025 at 10:37:55AM -0400, Alejandro Jimenez wrote: > Hi Philippe, > > On 10/9/25 10:19 PM, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote: > > Hi Alejandro, > > > > On 10/10/25 03:33, Alejandro Jimenez wrote: > > > > > I know the commit log is not consistent so far, but going forward I > > > propose we adopt the shorter prefix "amd_iommu: " for commit > > > summaries. There is no ambiguity (only one arch has amd_iommu), so > > > the full path is not required (i.e. avoid 'hw/i386/amd_iommu: '). > > > Shorter boilerplate leaves more space for relevant details, and > > > helps people like me who struggle to comply with character limits > > > :). > > > > What about "hw/amd_iommu:" to keep 'hw' in subject? > > Is there any tooling that relies on the hw prefix? Skipping the arch in the > prefix is confusing I think, since hw/amd_iommu is not a valid path in the > repository. > > I was looking for precedent of any preferred format in the commit logs under > hw/i386/ and there is a lot of variance. But specifically for IOMMU > emulation code, my interpretation is that the short prefix style is most > commonly used e.g. > > Common x86 IOMMU uses "x86-iommu: " > > The VT-d changes are typically in the form: > "intel_iommu: XYZ", which Clément also pointed out recently in: > https://lore.kernel.org/qemu-devel/[email protected]/ > > virtio IOMMU uses "virtio-iommu: " > > RISC-V IOMMU uses the full path: "hw/riscv/riscv-iommu: " > > SPARC64 has a few commits with "sun4u_iommu: " > > I don't believe the 'hw' component is required to avoid ambiguity, but > perhaps there is something else I am missing... > > Thank you, > Alejandro
FWIW I like amd_iommu -- MST
