From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:56183) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1db49Z-0000hn-1x for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 28 Jul 2017 08:14:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1db49W-0005lw-5E for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 28 Jul 2017 08:14:01 -0400 Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2017 14:13:53 +0200 From: Cornelia Huck Message-ID: <20170728141353.3b8382be@gondolin> In-Reply-To: <3abbfa87-d882-39ab-b4ab-66f3e68a2fb4@redhat.com> References: <20170728053610.15770-1-f4bug@amsat.org> <20170728053610.15770-6-f4bug@amsat.org> <20170728135614.3f14e3ad@gondolin> <3abbfa87-d882-39ab-b4ab-66f3e68a2fb4@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 05/47] MAINTAINERS: add missing KVM entry List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Paolo Bonzini Cc: Thomas Huth , Philippe =?UTF-8?B?TWF0aGlldS1EYXVk?= =?UTF-8?B?w6k=?= , qemu-trivial@nongnu.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org On Fri, 28 Jul 2017 13:59:08 +0200 Paolo Bonzini wrote: > On 28/07/2017 13:56, Cornelia Huck wrote: > > On Fri, 28 Jul 2017 13:51:14 +0200 > > Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > =20 > >> On 28/07/2017 09:00, Thomas Huth wrote: =20 > >>> On 28.07.2017 07:35, Philippe Mathieu-Daud=C3=A9 wrote: =20 > >>>> Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daud=C3=A9 > >>>> --- > >>>> MAINTAINERS | 1 + > >>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > >>>> > >>>> diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS > >>>> index 3b472d7a09..ece02522be 100644 > >>>> --- a/MAINTAINERS > >>>> +++ b/MAINTAINERS > >>>> @@ -278,6 +278,7 @@ S: Supported > >>>> F: */kvm.* > >>>> F: accel/kvm/ > >>>> F: include/sysemu/kvm*.h > >>>> +F: linux-headers/asm-*/kvm*.h =20 > >>> > >>> The linux-headers are not really maintained by the QEMU project - so I > >>> guess we do not need an entry for these? =20 > >> > >> Actually I agree with the patch. I'd like to be CCed on > >> update-linux-headers patches, and this achieves it. :) =20 > >=20 > > But would it not a better idea to add an entry for all headers touched > > by update-linux-headers, then? =20 >=20 > One thing doesn't exclude the other. That entry would also list the > script itself and linux-headers. KVM, VFIO and virtio patterns can only > list the files they care about. Migration could list userfaultfd, > possibly. And there's also include/standard-headers/, which includes > PCI and input subsystem files... It has to be perfected, but it's a > good idea. Personally, I'm not really a fan. If something is changed in one of the headers, it implies that either it has already been changed in the original headers in Linux (and I will have seen it then), or that someone is sending a preliminary patch (and I should hope that I'm already cc:ed for the changes that this headers change is for then). It does not really hurt, but it feels wrong.