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 bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C0873E6F06D for ; Fri, 1 Nov 2024 16:16:04 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender:List-Subscribe:List-Help :List-Post:List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:Content-Type: MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=tyTpg0lhlDGimy0ZvEFKhDPpfFFUWK/X72leUPUldo0=; b=e51E5ou90WJeS1oD9fzwnIH+g/ tF/TrrdlAiqSHekikLg1NvgNoYL4mwBxrpCuDL7NZ6HnlIEUATp+d+Lc+QT7/wLFi7v0C6msn08mq Tv+R+eDtHe+ppGkNNi2OUW33eWskJByIHxiTNGV//9osRRsLav/gugBAOsMjJxhpGqEqkbCTjrzf4 DuuALHpgDHFPJ4GIjp5bptQhlc32VqVIofucpj3ANOd+PXrHJY7gUmUVTlXoOfGh8ZuZVmJ8hBJZV ug2hxpviuWHN5phAWmwdAVdzjwGlJ9F4eNkbLTQ1yTTXvYzdxE/78DNbVShox19ETPXHNXiCe6bHA bcpGD7lw==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.98 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1t6uJU-00000007dJR-41pb; Fri, 01 Nov 2024 16:15:53 +0000 Received: from out-171.mta0.migadu.com ([91.218.175.171]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.98 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1t6uFU-00000007cSL-3CLq for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Fri, 01 Nov 2024 16:11:47 +0000 Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2024 09:11:25 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.dev; s=key1; t=1730477501; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=tyTpg0lhlDGimy0ZvEFKhDPpfFFUWK/X72leUPUldo0=; b=t+7ZZb8QkkiZMjWQXqf/2w9UWEZZ80XpBkF5UWSotFyMMCpQvxO+Ol6L1m097f5XvORbXi K4+CWGnk3tCVvjVR5h+fGMU59MESJ99/eJkLZYySXFlBVyIvx6MCcONQ29QfpCQsZtEPzB PjqX2uKrHQb2zbKSykrFjXm9JtGxBbA= X-Report-Abuse: Please report any abuse attempt to abuse@migadu.com and include these headers. From: Oliver Upton To: Sean Christopherson Cc: Mark Brown , Marc Zyngier , Anup Patel , Paul Walmsley , Palmer Dabbelt , Albert Ou , Paolo Bonzini , Christian Borntraeger , Janosch Frank , Claudio Imbrenda , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, kvm@vger.kernel.org, kvm-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Jones , James Houghton , David Woodhouse , linux-next@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 03/14] KVM: selftests: Return a value from vcpu_get_reg() instead of using an out-param Message-ID: References: <20241009154953.1073471-1-seanjc@google.com> <20241009154953.1073471-4-seanjc@google.com> <39ea24d8-9dae-447a-ae37-e65878c3806f@sirena.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20241101_091144_958644_C1D5AF0A X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 19.59 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Fri, Nov 01, 2024 at 08:59:16AM -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote: > > Can you instead just push out a topic branch and let the affected > > maintainers deal with it? This is the usual way we handle conflicts > > between trees... > > That'd work too, but as you note below, doing that now throws a wrench in things > because essentially all arch maintainers would need merge that topic branch, > otherwise linux-next would end up in the same state. TBH, I'm quite happy with that. Recent history has not been particularly convinincing to me that folks are actually testing arm64, let alone compiling for it when applying selftests patches. Otherwise, the alternative of respinning the global change for every -next breakage adds a decent amount of toil and gives the wrong impression of how long our patches have actually been baking in -next. > > > That would be a good oppurtunity to do the $(ARCH) directory switch[*] too, e.g. > > > have a "selftests_late" or whatever topic branch. > > > > The right time to do KVM-wide changes (even selftests) is *early* in the > > development cycle, not last minute. It gives us plenty of time to iron out > > the wrinkles. > > Yeah, that was the original plan, then the stupid strict aliasing bug happened, > and I honestly forgot the vcpu_get_reg() changes would need to be consumed by > other architectures. > > Other than letting me forget about this mess a few weeks earlier, there's no > good reason to force this into 6.13. So, I'll drop the series from 6.13, post > new versions of the this and the $(ARCH) series just before the merge window, > and then either send a pull request to Paolo for 6.14 as soon as the 6.13 merge > window closes, or ask/bribe Paolo to apply everything directly. Sounds good, punting to 6.14 seems reasonable. -- Thanks, Oliver