On 2025-10-09 08:36, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 08.10.2025 22:11, Jason Andryuk wrote:
--- a/MAINTAINERS
+++ b/MAINTAINERS
@@ -220,6 +220,23 @@ F: xen/drivers/acpi/
F: xen/include/acpi/
F: tools/libacpi/
+AMD IOMMU
+M: Jan Beulich <[email protected]>
+M: Andrew Cooper <[email protected]>
+M: Roger Pau Monné <[email protected]>
+R: Jason Andryuk <[email protected]>
+S: Supported
+F: xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/
+
+AMD SVM
+M: Jan Beulich <[email protected]>
+M: Andrew Cooper <[email protected]>
+M: Roger Pau Monné <[email protected]>
+R: Jason Andryuk <[email protected]>
+S: Supported
+F: xen/arch/x86/hvm/svm/
+F: xen/arch/x86/cpu/vpmu_amd.c
What about xen/arch/x86/include/asm/hvm/svm/ ? It didn't need specific
mentioning on the X86 entry, but it would now. Also F: entries generally
want sorting alphabetically as well.
Yes, that all sounds good. I based this on a revert of
8395f275ebd11b4cacb12da09911e7918ccc7518 and alphabetization was
incorrect there. Sorry about that.
@@ -601,7 +618,8 @@ M: Roger Pau Monné <[email protected]>
S: Supported
L: [email protected]
F: xen/arch/x86/
-F: xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/
+X: xen/arch/x86/hvm/svm/
+X: xen/arch/x86/cpu/vpmu_amd.c
Didn't the v1 discussion result in there being no need for these X:
entries?
I thought Anthony said they should be split out for proper nesting:
>The exclusion is likely unnecessary, and ./get_maintainer.pl will just
>get the information (email, ...) from every sections that a file match.
>But the duplication is necessary due to the "The meaning of nesting"
>described in the MAINTAINERS file.
I took the second sentence to mean they should remain.
As long as there's agreement, I'd be happy to make adjustments while
committing. Oleksii - I take it that ./MAINTAINERS changes can still go
in pretty freely?
Thanks,
Jason
