cover letter not considered Fwd: [GIT PULL 0/7] KVM: s390: Fixes for 7.2

cover letter not considered Fwd: [GIT PULL 0/7] KVM: s390: Fixes for 7.2

[Christian Borntraeger]

Folks,

I am a bit puzzled. Looking at https://sashiko.dev/#/?list=org.kernel.vger.linux-s390
I do see  1,2,3,4,5,6,7 but not 0 for the PULL request above
  Clicking on on of those mails then also has the 0 mail so its there
https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260727095720.9150-2-borntraeger%40linux.ibm.com

but during review this seems to have been lost. This is unfortunate as the cover letter might
help to find the right tree and with 3 failed applies several already fixed
things (in those 3 patches) are reported instead.


For other pull requests I DO see GIT PULL 0/x. Just search for PULL
on https://sashiko.dev/#/?list=org.kernel.vger.linux-s390
to see bad examples (my pull) and good examples from Claudio.
As we both used git send-email I am puzzled what I did wrong.

any quick idea?

Christian

PS: in addition to that, those patches DID apply to torvalds/master at the point of submission.



-------- Weitergeleitete Nachricht --------
Betreff: [GIT PULL 0/7] KVM: s390: Fixes for 7.2
Datum: Mon, 27 Jul 2026 11:57:13 +0200
Von: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>
An: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Kopie (CC): KVM <kvm@vger.kernel.org>, Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com>, Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@linux.ibm.com>, David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>, linux-s390 <linux-s390@vger.kernel.org>, Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>, Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com>, Vasily Gorbik <gor@linux.ibm.com>, Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@linux.ibm.com>, Sven Schnelle <svens@linux.ibm.com>, Matthew Rosato <mjrosato@linux.ibm.com>, Jaehoon Kim <jhkim@linux.ibm.com>, Douglas Freimuth <freimuth@linux.ibm.com>, Farhan Ali <alifm@linux.ibm.com>

Paolo,

some more fixes triggered by AI bug reports or testing.
Mostly for PCI support.
This also has a regression fix that we introduced in 7.2-rc1

The following changes since commit 3e3aa6da87d30a0064a17b836685cd43c90a3572:

   KVM: s390: pci: Fix handling of AIF enable without AISB (2026-07-09 16:23:10 +0200)

are available in the Git repository at:

   git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/kvms390/linux.git  tags/kvm-s390-master-7.2-2

for you to fetch changes up to 9972befc3e34ff8b6847198c84f11bfc312dde40:

   KVM: s390: Fall back to short-term pinning in MAP ioctl (2026-07-27 09:23:53 +0200)


All fixes had no new sashiko findings, just pre-existing issues or
finding that are being fixed by other patches of the series.

We have some more fixes pending for gmap and vfio-ccw that still need
testing or sashiko fixups, but we should process these fixes now.


----------------------------------------------------------------
KVM: s390: Fixes for 7.2

- several fixes for PCI passthru in s390 kvm
- fix a 7.2-rc regression in the adapter interrupt mapping code

----------------------------------------------------------------
Farhan Ali (6):
       KVM: s390: pci: Reject adapter interrupt forwarding if already enabled
       KVM: s390: pci: Fix memory accounting for pinned/unpinned pages
       KVM: s390: pci: Fix missing error codes and memory unaccounting
       KVM: s390: pci: Fix NULL dereference on AIBV allocation failure
       KVM: s390: pci: Fix resource leak on IRQ registration failure
       KVM: s390: pci: Validate AIBV and AISB before pinning guest pages

Jaehoon Kim (1):
       KVM: s390: Fall back to short-term pinning in MAP ioctl

  Documentation/virt/kvm/devices/s390_flic.rst |  15 +++-
  arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h             |   5 ++
  arch/s390/kvm/interrupt.c                    |  56 ++++++++++----
  arch/s390/kvm/pci.c                          | 107 +++++++++++++++++++++------
  arch/s390/kvm/pci.h                          |   2 +
  5 files changed, 148 insertions(+), 37 deletions(-)

Re: cover letter not considered Fwd: [GIT PULL 0/7] KVM: s390: Fixes for 7.2

[Derek Barbosa]

Hi Christian, sorry for the delay

On Thu, Jul 30, 2026 at 06:42:10PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> Folks,
> 
> I am a bit puzzled. Looking at https://sashiko.dev/#/?list=org.kernel.vger.linux-s390
> I do see  1,2,3,4,5,6,7 but not 0 for the PULL request above
>  Clicking on on of those mails then also has the 0 mail so its there
> https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260727095720.9150-2-borntraeger%40linux.ibm.com
> 
> but during review this seems to have been lost. This is unfortunate as the cover letter might
> help to find the right tree and with 3 failed applies several already fixed
> things (in those 3 patches) are reported instead.

IIUC in the current code, cover letters are not considered patches in
the DB and therfore do not get forwarded to the reviewer processes.

I have been working on improving the concept of a "patch series summary" that
propagates a small snippet of "context" to all reviewer threads. Currently, the
individual worker threads only get a range from base..HEAD and use git log
--format=%s to get insight into other patches in a series.

So the cover letter never really makes it's way into the "working context" of a
single worker in isolation.

Is your concern not being able to quickly view the '0'-indexed mail? or that it
may help with review accuracy if it were to make it's way into the review
process?


Cheers,
-- 
Derek <debarbos@redhat.com>

Re: cover letter not considered Fwd: [GIT PULL 0/7] KVM: s390: Fixes for 7.2

[Christian Borntraeger]

Am 31.07.26 um 17:02 schrieb Derek Barbosa:
> Hi Christian, sorry for the delay
> 
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2026 at 06:42:10PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>> Folks,
>>
>> I am a bit puzzled. Looking at https://sashiko.dev/#/?list=org.kernel.vger.linux-s390
>> I do see  1,2,3,4,5,6,7 but not 0 for the PULL request above
>>   Clicking on on of those mails then also has the 0 mail so its there
>> https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260727095720.9150-2-borntraeger%40linux.ibm.com
>>
>> but during review this seems to have been lost. This is unfortunate as the cover letter might
>> help to find the right tree and with 3 failed applies several already fixed
>> things (in those 3 patches) are reported instead.
> 
> IIUC in the current code, cover letters are not considered patches in
> the DB and therfore do not get forwarded to the reviewer processes.
> 
> I have been working on improving the concept of a "patch series summary" that
> propagates a small snippet of "context" to all reviewer threads. Currently, the
> individual worker threads only get a range from base..HEAD and use git log
> --format=%s to get insight into other patches in a series.
> 
> So the cover letter never really makes it's way into the "working context" of a
> single worker in isolation.
> 
> Is your concern not being able to quickly view the '0'-indexed mail? or that it
> may help with review accuracy if it were to make it's way into the review
> process?
My concern is more that we get reports about issues that are fixed in a subsequent patch.
But maybe this is just due to random email delay that sashiko receives some mails later?
Maybe we could delay review for 5 minutes or so if this seems to be part of a series.
But I think we already detect that?

Re: cover letter not considered Fwd: [GIT PULL 0/7] KVM: s390: Fixes for 7.2

[Derek Barbosa]

On Mon, Aug 03, 2026 at 09:34:37AM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> Am 31.07.26 um 17:02 schrieb Derek Barbosa:
> > Hi Christian, sorry for the delay
> > 
> > On Thu, Jul 30, 2026 at 06:42:10PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> > > Folks,
> > > 
> > > I am a bit puzzled. Looking at https://sashiko.dev/#/?list=org.kernel.vger.linux-s390
> > > I do see  1,2,3,4,5,6,7 but not 0 for the PULL request above
> > >   Clicking on on of those mails then also has the 0 mail so its there
> > > https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260727095720.9150-2-borntraeger%40linux.ibm.com
> > > 
> > > but during review this seems to have been lost. This is unfortunate as the cover letter might
> > > help to find the right tree and with 3 failed applies several already fixed
> > > things (in those 3 patches) are reported instead.
> > 
> > IIUC in the current code, cover letters are not considered patches in
> > the DB and therfore do not get forwarded to the reviewer processes.
> > 
> > I have been working on improving the concept of a "patch series summary" that
> > propagates a small snippet of "context" to all reviewer threads. Currently, the
> > individual worker threads only get a range from base..HEAD and use git log
> > --format=%s to get insight into other patches in a series.
> > 
> > So the cover letter never really makes it's way into the "working context" of a
> > single worker in isolation.
> > 
> > Is your concern not being able to quickly view the '0'-indexed mail? or that it
> > may help with review accuracy if it were to make it's way into the review
> > process?
> My concern is more that we get reports about issues that are fixed in a subsequent patch.

Got it. I've had something sitting on a local branch for some time. I will see
if I can push it up when Roman returns. [0]

> But maybe this is just due to random email delay that sashiko receives some mails later?
> Maybe we could delay review for 5 minutes or so if this seems to be part of a series.
> But I think we already detect that?
> 
I don't think that is the issue. I could be wrong.

[0] https://github.com/sashiko-dev/sashiko/issues/392

-- 
Derek <debarbos@redhat.com>