From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17025C76195 for ; Wed, 22 Mar 2023 17:41:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230114AbjCVRlN (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Mar 2023 13:41:13 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:56768 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230036AbjCVRlL (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Mar 2023 13:41:11 -0400 Received: from mail-pl1-x64a.google.com (mail-pl1-x64a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::64a]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5B27354C80 for ; Wed, 22 Mar 2023 10:41:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pl1-x64a.google.com with SMTP id h4-20020a170902f54400b001a1f5f00f3fso1008467plf.2 for ; Wed, 22 Mar 2023 10:41:10 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20210112; t=1679506870; h=cc:to:from:subject:message-id:references:mime-version:in-reply-to :date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=YesdF1o+GzhDJuZ/Udj8ca6OlrwlbgmV+ssn/MViB3Y=; b=ES3MTTWVJF3Lh9miyIydYMrcdquqjUJ6i1dtVLAn9HvdFiW7C/QyBtdCE/0BVmIKgH w6st+X+tszk3NDXWw53/EQYGIAVOUgS2EmGWTB2b21oAw8mMThn8Lq3NbR4D8xa9Ex5W DAW36YpqcBa6iPM2REL2rxdGH1wW4ICNysGSfxLlirqGVqyK69b1abef6wBYCUOOhquI hp7L58cwWLIe0NtUUUi6//q4MXht6OYjPUJHcNQrLkD/sIS78oEaMtQKT8nt+1L+JN28 Znfy7kT/t8aI0yxigNLVwKwPzLjAqs9GAlPmEuwczJQIXlHVKQWf9UldkRLaNke8wKIn i06Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; t=1679506870; h=cc:to:from:subject:message-id:references:mime-version:in-reply-to :date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=YesdF1o+GzhDJuZ/Udj8ca6OlrwlbgmV+ssn/MViB3Y=; b=DXdslxlhg8gh6KCfgIIy6qln7aysioh+jM5rPiWJpeAVfjyQYAyQCrb9Isw5z+8hzG 7zMTT+cqZo5AFUWnyoLoJWYtkMxpIKLewolx4OdEmnWhmfKS71gwezS6iVvIr+G7Nepr 7kTRFl4Lrtz4Dh3jOzAOTdpihliC1BnVKN64J/TU5pKiRVZqpJhVS7R/7rsDuut6sXY1 JRQCoKwCc2gzFxrIvkePLrGSuuVrZP0bG+OMaPGNy30Fw5GFpWAqZLaBNG4EF05Io9K0 cu2uoCE1AUDY5BUS8XcEzIUd0Tjh2Vjaze94+uK/QAzJGN3bFaC7UiDETfUFu3uVzvt3 JtqQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKXYTF30rgWV0j5qD5HGXKuh9kSFQwiLM91OBfsIF2oTeBPhjPiq PYTvsXAF9APiSHF9Ci7CDUg7E/ArQyA= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set8qlHUyhwjwk3c90JV8Tq1N4wnyQ//6TF16RskTAhQJfsd+IUr4994tmY3YTrka7GXpTeNq0/ISbns= X-Received: from zagreus.c.googlers.com ([fda3:e722:ac3:cc00:7f:e700:c0a8:5c37]) (user=seanjc job=sendgmr) by 2002:a65:6399:0:b0:50f:53aa:f662 with SMTP id h25-20020a656399000000b0050f53aaf662mr991438pgv.5.1679506869873; Wed, 22 Mar 2023 10:41:09 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2023 10:41:08 -0700 In-Reply-To: <87ilf0nc95.fsf@mpe.ellerman.id.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 References: <20230316031732.3591455-1-npiggin@gmail.com> <87ilf0nc95.fsf@mpe.ellerman.id.au> Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] KVM: PPC: support kvm selftests From: Sean Christopherson To: Michael Ellerman Cc: Nicholas Piggin , Paolo Bonzini , Shuah Khan , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: kvm@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Mar 16, 2023, Michael Ellerman wrote: > Nicholas Piggin writes: > > Hi, > > > > This series adds initial KVM selftests support for powerpc > > (64-bit, BookS). > > Awesome. > > > It spans 3 maintainers but it does not really > > affect arch/powerpc, and it is well contained in selftests > > code, just touches some makefiles and a tiny bit headers so > > conflicts should be unlikely and trivial. > > > > I guess Paolo is the best point to merge these, if no comments > > or objections? > > Yeah. If it helps: > > Acked-by: Michael Ellerman (powerpc) What is the long term plan for KVM PPC maintenance? I was under the impression that KVM PPC was trending toward "bug fixes only", but the addition of selftests support suggests otherwise. I ask primarily because routing KVM PPC patches through the PPC tree is going to be problematic if KVM PPC sees signficiant development. The current situation is ok because the volume of patches is low and KVM PPC isn't trying to drive anything substantial into common KVM code, but if that changes... My other concern is that for selftests specifically, us KVM folks are taking on more maintenance burden by supporting PPC. AFAIK, none of the people that focus on KVM selftests in any meaningful capacity have access to PPC hardware, let alone know enough about the architecture to make intelligent code changes. Don't get me wrong, I'm very much in favor of more testing, I just don't want KVM to get left holding the bag.