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 00F0EE6F06D for ; Fri, 1 Nov 2024 16:26:29 +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=1evd5lGbHCuOT8tfPmadcUQqa04tuGgPb+HSVtJmF8k=; b=LetlufilBn+E7IIAv+xsccizx+ pYJ7SG/+kdNHHTfzcIKg89wbkO82INAsQCQrMCt2ADanH3OtHHUcmgcPFmsyLI5AxTqp4xfvFgxxE XPEpO2p88x0syQQZeuoxAVL8U3t3Wxv9spjFPH99Ioyn+cp97gdNbHwkkrZNHeIXBm0rKHTFGqgYb bn9pxqGa/jQUCngoHPcWXzIIeXJkFdWXiKZrRC/Vtc5VUMbY/dmJrWPDB4Mx5d2LOgASPEIBTCaRu lhPvhOhzwKWX2Q18gmlnXoM5+9Q+3AnOgadmRmXUHQM2pnRVXqd1ynfX+gFdkG0lygQ04SHfzT9Xr byxnlS7g==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.98 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1t6uTZ-00000007fWE-0V1L; Fri, 01 Nov 2024 16:26:17 +0000 Received: from out-182.mta0.migadu.com ([91.218.175.182]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.98 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1t6uQ7-00000007eXV-1k8R for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Fri, 01 Nov 2024 16:22:45 +0000 Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2024 09:22:30 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.dev; s=key1; t=1730478160; 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=1evd5lGbHCuOT8tfPmadcUQqa04tuGgPb+HSVtJmF8k=; b=lZKBzO/N0DQ5XxKAtQkk86AjV5mYav4byhccRQ4eBvOGkAaxRH67vY48wf6QsY3GcRJOQc Jcc90LHPWM7riQBmj5VKnWMXM9M0Jd1tad4KG4IqFHlBItdwH/wCsGkCn5RbmsKe15w2bz xwxx3Z3KDUlP1gGnQMEpFuUjx4hu94M= 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_092243_645856_AD9BBAE6 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 19.34 ) 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 09:16:42AM -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote: > On Fri, Nov 01, 2024, Oliver Upton wrote: > > 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. > > FWIW, I did compile all patches on all KVM architectures, including selftests. > But my base obviously didn't include the kvm-arm64 branch :-/ Oh, that rip wasn't aimed at you, commit 76f972c2cfdf ("KVM: selftests: Fix build on architectures other than x86_64") just came to mind. > One thing I'll add to my workflow would be to do a local merge (and smoke test) > of linux-next into kvm-x86 next before pushing it out. This isn't the only snafu > this cycle where such a sanity check would have saved me and others a bit of pain. Eh, shit happens, that's what -next is for :) The only point I wanted to make was that it is perfectly fine by me to spread the workload w/ a topic branch if things blow up sometime after your changes show up in -next. -- Thanks, Oliver