Re: GVT-g status (was: Re: [PATCH 0/3] drm/i915/gvt: Deadcoding)

Zhi Wang
2025-01-13T10:17:58Z

On Sat, 11 Jan 2025 14:26:01 +0900
Zhenyu Wang <zhenyuw.linux@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Jan 10, 2025 at 12:49:27PM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
> > On Thu, 09 Jan 2025, Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com> wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jan 06, 2025 at 04:30:20PM +0900, Zhenyu Wang wrote:
> > >> On Sun, Dec 22, 2024 at 12:25:09AM +0000, Dr. David Alan Gilbert
> > >> wrote:
> > >> > Note: zhenyuw@linux.intel.com's address bounces:
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >> yeah, I've left Intel so can't use that box any more, looks
> > >> Rodrigo hasn't queue up my address change patch yet. Rodrigo?
> > >
> > > pushed to drm-intel-next now, although I was assuming this to come
> > > on a gvt pull request...
> > >
> > > what about this patch here? coming in a PR or should I take this
> > > directly at drm-intel-next as well?
> >
> > AFAICT the last gvt-next pull request was more than two years ago
> > and gvt-fixes slightly less than one year ago.
> >
> > There's a single cleanup commit in gvt-next applied two years ago
> > for which there hasn't been a pull request.
> >
> > The GVT github page [1] says, "This repository has been archived by
> > the owner on Oct 3, 2024. It is now read-only." The intel-gvt-dev
> > mailing list [2] appears to be mostly spam.
> >
> > Seems to me something like this would be appropriate:
> >
> > diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
> > index 1c3eab5d2b1a..161206fdaf05 100644
> > --- a/MAINTAINERS
> > +++ b/MAINTAINERS
> > @@ -11557,11 +11557,10 @@ F: drivers/gpio/gpio-tangier.h
> > INTEL GVT-g DRIVERS (Intel GPU Virtualization)
> > M: Zhenyu Wang <zhenyuw.linux@gmail.com>
> > M: Zhi Wang <zhi.wang.linux@gmail.com>
> > -L: intel-gvt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
> > L: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> > -S: Supported
> > +S: Maintained
> > W: https://github.com/intel/gvt-linux/wiki
> > -T: git https://github.com/intel/gvt-linux.git
> > +T: git https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/i915/kernel.git
> > F: drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gvt/
> >
>
> Looks fine with me.
>
> Acked-by: Zhenyu Wang <zhenyuw.linux@gmail.com>
>
> > INTEL HID EVENT DRIVER
> >
> > But I don't think it would be far from the truth to have "S: Odd
> > Fixes" either. And the extreme would be to just remove the whole
> > maintainers entry and have it fall back to the i915 entry.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
>
> When I left Intel, I have raised similar question to manager or
> related people to see their ideas on how to keep GVT-g maintenance
> work for upstream, but I didn't get real answers before my last day
> at Intel...So still cc some intel gvt related people to double
> confirm.
>
> For me, it's fine to remove the maintainer entry maybe only keep as
> reviewer?
>
> Thanks to raise up this issue, Jani!
>

Works for me as well. I am mostly doing this as a hobby on my Skylake
desktop in my spare time.

Z.