From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([63.128.21.124]:48148 "EHLO us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1729542AbhAUNoo (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Jan 2021 08:44:44 -0500 Subject: Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v4 2/3] s390x: define UV compatible I/O allocation References: <1611220392-22628-1-git-send-email-pmorel@linux.ibm.com> <1611220392-22628-3-git-send-email-pmorel@linux.ibm.com> <6c232520-dbd1-80e4-e3a3-949964df7403@linux.ibm.com> <3bce47db-c58c-6a2e-be72-9953f16a2dd4@linux.ibm.com> From: Thomas Huth Message-ID: <0a46a299-c52d-2c7f-bb38-8d58afe053e0@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2021 14:43:03 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <3bce47db-c58c-6a2e-be72-9953f16a2dd4@linux.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed" Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit List-ID: To: Pierre Morel , Janosch Frank , kvm@vger.kernel.org Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, david@redhat.com, cohuck@redhat.com, imbrenda@linux.ibm.com, drjones@redhat.com, pbonzini@redhat.com On 21/01/2021 14.02, Pierre Morel wrote: > > > On 1/21/21 10:46 AM, Janosch Frank wrote: >> On 1/21/21 10:13 AM, Pierre Morel wrote: >>> To centralize the memory allocation for I/O we define >>> the alloc_io_page/free_io_page functions which share the I/O >>> memory with the host in case the guest runs with >>> protected virtualization. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Pierre Morel >>> --- >>>   MAINTAINERS           |  1 + >>>   lib/s390x/malloc_io.c | 70 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>>   lib/s390x/malloc_io.h | 45 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>>   s390x/Makefile        |  1 + >>>   4 files changed, 117 insertions(+) >>>   create mode 100644 lib/s390x/malloc_io.c >>>   create mode 100644 lib/s390x/malloc_io.h >>> >>> diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS >>> index 54124f6..89cb01e 100644 >>> --- a/MAINTAINERS >>> +++ b/MAINTAINERS >>> @@ -82,6 +82,7 @@ M: Thomas Huth >>>   M: David Hildenbrand >>>   M: Janosch Frank >>>   R: Cornelia Huck >>> +R: Pierre Morel >> >> If you're ok with the amount of mails you'll get then go ahead. >> But I think maintainer file changes should always be in a separate patch. >> >>>   L: kvm@vger.kernel.org >>>   L: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org >>>   F: s390x/* >>> diff --git a/lib/s390x/malloc_io.c b/lib/s390x/malloc_io.c >>> new file mode 100644 >>> index 0000000..bfe8c6a >>> --- /dev/null >>> +++ b/lib/s390x/malloc_io.c >>> @@ -0,0 +1,70 @@ >>> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 >> >> I think we wanted to use: > > @Janosch , @Thomas > >> /* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later */ > > or > > // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only > > later or only ? If it's a new file, it's up to the author. I personally prefer -later, but I think IBM's preference is normally -only instead. Please check with your colleagues. Most s390x-related files in the kvm-unit-tests currently use "GPL-2.0-only", so that should be ok anyway. > /* or // ? I don't mind. // seems to be kernel style for .c files, but so far we've only used /* with SPDX in the kvm-unit-tests, so both should be fine, I think. > Just to : Why are you people not using the Linux style code completely > instead of making new exceptions. > > i.e. SPDX license and MAINTAINERS Actually, I wonder why the Linux documentation still recommends the identifiers that are marked as deprecated on the SPDX website. The deprecated "GPL-2.0" can be rather confusing, since it IMHO can easily be mistaken as "GPL-2.0+", so the newer identifiers are better, indeed. Not sure what you mean with MAINTAINERS, though. Thomas