From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.158.5]:57466 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728942AbhAUNsx (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Jan 2021 08:48:53 -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> <0a46a299-c52d-2c7f-bb38-8d58afe053e0@redhat.com> From: Pierre Morel Message-ID: Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2021 14:47:57 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <0a46a299-c52d-2c7f-bb38-8d58afe053e0@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed" Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit List-ID: To: Thomas Huth , 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 1/21/21 2:43 PM, Thomas Huth wrote: > 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. Thanks for the explanations :) For MAINTAINERS, the Linux kernel checkpatch warns that we should use TABS instead of SPACES between item and names. Pierre -- Pierre Morel IBM Lab Boeblingen