public inbox for kvm@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: Like Xu <like.xu.linux@gmail.com>
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] KVM: vmx, pmu: accept 0 for absent MSRs when host-initiated
Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2022 16:39:24 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YpeWPAHNhQQ/lRKF@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ce2b4fed-3d9e-a179-a907-5b8e09511b7d@gmail.com>

On Wed, Jun 01, 2022, Like Xu wrote:
> On 1/6/2022 2:37 am, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > Can we just punt this out of kvm/queue until its been properly reviewed?  At the
> > barest of glances, there are multiple flaws that should block this from being
> 
> TBH, our reviewers' attention could not be focused on these patches until the
> day it was ready to be ravaged. "Try to accept" is a good thing, and things need
> to move forward, not simply be abandoned to the side.

I strongly disagree, to put it mildly.  Accepting flawed, buggy code because
reviewers and maintainers are overloaded does not solve anything, it only makes
the problem worse.  More than likely, the submitter(s) has moved on to writing
the next pile of patches, while the same set of people that are trying to review
submissions are left to pick up the pieces.  There are numerous examples of
accepting code without (IMO) proper review and tests costing us dearly in the
long run.

If people want their code to be merged more quickly, then they can do so by
helping address the underlying problems, e.g. write tests that actually try to
break their feature instead of doing the bare minimum, review each others code,
clean up the existing code (and tests!), etc...  There's a reason vPMU features
tend to not get a lot of reviews; KVM doesn't even get the basics right, so there's
not a lot of interest in trying to enable fancy, complex features.

Merging patches/series because they _haven't_ gotten reviews is all kinds of
backwards.  In addition to creating _more_ work for reviewers and maintainers,
it effectively penalizes teams/companies for reviewing each other's code, which
is seriously fubar and again exacerbates the problem of reviewers being overloaded.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2022-06-01 16:39 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-05-31 17:54 [PATCH 0/2] KVM: vmx, pmu: respect KVM_GET_MSR_INDEX_LIST/KVM_SET_MSR contracts Paolo Bonzini
2022-05-31 17:54 ` [PATCH 1/2] KVM: vmx, pmu: accept 0 for absent MSRs when host-initiated Paolo Bonzini
2022-05-31 18:37   ` Sean Christopherson
2022-06-01  2:46     ` Like Xu
2022-06-01  8:50       ` Paolo Bonzini
2022-06-01 16:39       ` Sean Christopherson [this message]
2022-06-02  2:12         ` Like Xu
2022-06-15 18:52           ` Sean Christopherson
2022-06-16 10:37             ` Paolo Bonzini
2022-06-16 15:30               ` Sean Christopherson
2022-06-01  8:54     ` Paolo Bonzini
2022-06-01  9:12       ` Yang, Weijiang
2022-06-01 10:15         ` Paolo Bonzini
2022-06-01 10:42           ` Yang, Weijiang
2022-05-31 17:54 ` [PATCH 2/2] KVM: x86: always allow host-initiated writes to PMU MSRs Paolo Bonzini
2022-06-01  1:12   ` Like Xu
2022-06-08 22:22   ` Sean Christopherson

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=YpeWPAHNhQQ/lRKF@google.com \
    --to=seanjc@google.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=like.xu.linux@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox