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 87161CE7A81 for ; Fri, 22 Sep 2023 23:00:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230203AbjIVXAc (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Sep 2023 19:00:32 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:56332 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230142AbjIVXAb (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Sep 2023 19:00:31 -0400 Received: from mail-yw1-x1149.google.com (mail-yw1-x1149.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::1149]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A15D019A for ; Fri, 22 Sep 2023 16:00:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-yw1-x1149.google.com with SMTP id 00721157ae682-59e8ebc0376so44093457b3.2 for ; Fri, 22 Sep 2023 16:00:25 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20230601; t=1695423625; x=1696028425; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=cc:to:from:subject:message-id:references:mime-version:in-reply-to :date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=GE2XXcB9Z66Z/+jmtr3Nreygo5a18psEdddNC3jXP6Y=; b=xPMxAbEcBMGfshrovAJk3fnjGGGtpnCdd29BDX1YBo/dUj4xgQIanjgWB0cPILaQMU thTAhP3UWk2L+ndkbkxXXzwy1By4H6QaqDw19xK5ze6UgEk2uu5lZ9udl2Q0iD4DTY1x jV8bYHIUR3gkFelVhRtv7dZFsj3be8bf++/kozwTKFNWvKaLtehlCUkshOhnkzHnxKDx Kym6S+o+DFEwH5nGZ9xehdXT2+anAzjXJgm46qTtKm9ITCLUdzuE0nsmsXWarRQzq2Bd oIPMaNjfqt2D2tgl9ilRG1R0T5ttBSSOg5Hbbu+VG6yV9FSK9m8HOPybKumXYIWkQNly IoVA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1695423625; x=1696028425; 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=GE2XXcB9Z66Z/+jmtr3Nreygo5a18psEdddNC3jXP6Y=; b=GBMAgJfMk7WPkwJzN7islLSn1vVYdabxWrWFvMDiIB2MRze1orfhdox20tpcDicrTk hxQ1cu/XIcekoHgsTir7vB+ja1td/ENy/eHM4SD6KcMrknd2Bcgd/Eb7PW0h7scSKLoC Kfv4fHt4eicPxFqaU2EOSvBwJ0iBcEAH+8JKeUZGz21a8KFgRvi2L9okcy2nJaIKt4hH AGrM4SUY+YnbpuR4KsBQ0tbJKt6AVOwJKvl+MP3i08GKzzeaCAahX90fGwl77ZJWnmCu Mtr8njqosWNFms4DETL62aW3Pds0+zLNIeqNsWc7X3k1yRfm0lzLxADunhfPP8dOXXUu pv1Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yy0d+EpHJP1/A2Jo6+kjilM1CVOwTJpX2tMVSLe1Ar3bpqs9cgq V837lyDfomAKJmYqnwFDz0xNfczd6hY= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IG2ZVlmsIIglpXuyb4CgEnWQeWJGH+b3kmXiZVTDWBfzw2cJO69TjNv1VyjQiXXkd3aiJHhtKFhM4U= X-Received: from zagreus.c.googlers.com ([fda3:e722:ac3:cc00:7f:e700:c0a8:5c37]) (user=seanjc job=sendgmr) by 2002:a81:b285:0:b0:59b:d33b:5de0 with SMTP id q127-20020a81b285000000b0059bd33b5de0mr15233ywh.1.1695423624871; Fri, 22 Sep 2023 16:00:24 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2023 16:00:23 -0700 In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 References: <20230901185646.2823254-1-jmattson@google.com> Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] KVM: x86: Synthesize at most one PMI per VM-exit From: Sean Christopherson To: Mingwei Zhang Cc: Jim Mattson , kvm@vger.kernel.org, Paolo Bonzini , Like Xu , Roman Kagan , Kan Liang , Dapeng1 Mi Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: kvm@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Sep 22, 2023, Mingwei Zhang wrote: > So yes, they could be put together and they could be put separately. > But I don't see why they _cannot_ be together or cause confusion. Because they don't need to be put together. Roman's patch kinda sorta overlaps with the prev_counter mess, but Jim's fixes are entirely orthogonal. If one person initially posted such a series with everything together I probably wouldn't care *too* much, but combining patches and/or series that aren't tightly coupled or dependent in some way usually does more harm than good. E.g. if a maintainer has complaints against only one or two patches in series of unrelated patches, then grabbing the "good" patches is unnecessarily difficult. It's not truly hard on the maintainer's end, but little bits of avoidable friction in the process adds up across hundreds and thousands of patches. FWIW, my plan is to apply Roman's patch pretty much as-is, grab v2 from Jim, and post my cleanups as a separate series on top (maybe two series, really haven't thought about it yet). The only reason I have them all in a single branch is because there are code conflicts and I know I will apply the patches from Roman and Jim first, i.e. I didn't want to develop on a base that I knew would become stale. > So, I would like to put them together in the same context with a cover letter > fully describing the details. I certainly won't object to a thorough bug report/analysis, but I'd prefer that Jim's series be posted separately (though I don't care if it's you or Jim that posts it).