Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 23 Jun 2022 19:58:03 +0200 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: Reorganize KVM/x86 maintainership | From | Paolo Bonzini <> |
| |
On 6/23/22 14:05, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote: >> +KVM PARAVIRT (KVM/paravirt) >> +M: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> >> +R: Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com> >> +L: kvm@vger.kernel.org >> +S: Supported >> +T: git git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/virt/kvm/kvm.git >> +F: arch/x86/kernel/kvm.c >> +F: arch/x86/kernel/kvmclock.c >> +F: arch/x86/include/asm/pvclock-abi.h >> +F: include/linux/kvm_para.h >> +F: include/uapi/linux/kvm_para.h >> +F: include/uapi/asm-generic/kvm_para.h >> +F: include/asm-generic/kvm_para.h >> +F: arch/um/include/asm/kvm_para.h >> +F: arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_para.h >> +F: arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/kvm_para.h > > If we add Async PF to the 'KVM/paravirt' scope: > > +F: virt/kvm/async_pf.c > and maybe even > +F: arch/x86/kvm/x86.c > > then I can probably volunteer as a reviewer.
There is of course a host component to all paravirt infrastructure, the idea was to have a separate part specifically for the guest side. It tends to have its own set of issues (e.g. suspend/resume, 32-bit, etc.). I will add you anyway as reviewer, it makes sense.
>> +KVM X86 HYPER-V (KVM/hyper-v) >> +M: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com> >> +M: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> >> +M: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> > > Don't we also need: > > S: Supported > L: kvm@vger.kernel.org > > here?
Yeah, especially the "S" (the list is caught by the generic KVM part).
Paolo
>> +T: git git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/virt/kvm/kvm.git >> +F: arch/x86/kvm/hyperv.* >> +F: arch/x86/kvm/kvm_onhyperv.* >> +F: arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm_onhyperv.* > > +F: arch/x86/kvm/svm/hyperv.* > >> +F: arch/x86/kvm/vmx/evmcs.* >> + >> KERNFS >> M: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> >> M: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> >
| |