From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [216.205.24.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BA77570 for ; Wed, 19 May 2021 11:18:51 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1621423130; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=NWPwTLXUbkkuBeNGwn+3y597gm6t7tmE54rpjMpE4pA=; b=RKWa2iA9rxg69RsfOxR9jwKscMv7Fhob28ukgfKT56LqXY+LuSIfkSuM7TyJgnF/l48eU9 gQ8jEjZQenGDyyaK0IkqOulyzt0ePcT38Edurz8qcswlmtKsyBS3OTBtICpxUG6BIgkNkK FnhPQaZ1KwVtz90da/4f05znrC04xCQ= Received: from mail-wr1-f72.google.com (mail-wr1-f72.google.com [209.85.221.72]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-441-49AGpcVkNNO659jRkXwHzg-1; Wed, 19 May 2021 07:18:49 -0400 X-MC-Unique: 49AGpcVkNNO659jRkXwHzg-1 Received: by mail-wr1-f72.google.com with SMTP id u20-20020a0560001614b02901115c8f2d89so6942561wrb.3 for ; Wed, 19 May 2021 04:18:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:to:cc:references:from:subject:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=NWPwTLXUbkkuBeNGwn+3y597gm6t7tmE54rpjMpE4pA=; b=B/bUPzHa2mTRPx10J/lYeO8+nydLhoMyaQ3/tzJGG4em+bk9hIEtHtcxDPBqP2Ilg/ zFenXE/bkMMDQXpyziv97t5UkB4ynBl0N4WZVFdgFcBQKum2NOyZk/7gxQLPxWedJBot WQel1nsXvD0kQVcjGFQA+C2FWf+Q7qkwoSvoSw1Im8MHLQeAhWITwy790obDZkuR55Dl Y66aPk38nLrlHUeY3p4aoGOziSh13bSST66pfTj3nv05W6M0JCjS3Mru8hSO+pSlfDQe KeZlXjtod1tPPdj6x74v25lP3mL7jLIuII9CFaKDG+Dh+azujK6qZuYmy9nuHE2ReiV1 0Q9w== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530jsEIEMbOraL9rjhu5GKcwvqh1DOgE7Og2G9jRcS5G90pN3a5X vH2jWdH6TaGn4/bZFaCYxupkPZk62hwZc4bcxz7SPjHiZu2AM4OhPfLHfmlz9Qg3RlcS/IvtxmT UJqIyl7H5wcxVwIz5GeiVAkdIRsq9D/C17HK/tuZSMEbR7luPyoBJNtB7x7yjOcTosZUcaeqviu Bimg== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:6910:: with SMTP id t16mr13720374wru.416.1621423127757; Wed, 19 May 2021 04:18:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzsKGojU2DgZBTVi6QJ5uaGR/qngB2I/7EjHlNBsabqXVj4gNUE+e0fQBwiJa1DS8Rsi1PZLg== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:6910:: with SMTP id t16mr13720320wru.416.1621423127405; Wed, 19 May 2021 04:18:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPv6:2001:b07:6468:f312:c8dd:75d4:99ab:290a? ([2001:b07:6468:f312:c8dd:75d4:99ab:290a]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id v10sm28926558wrq.0.2021.05.19.04.18.45 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 19 May 2021 04:18:46 -0700 (PDT) To: Greg Kroah-Hartman , Anup Patel Cc: Anup Patel , Palmer Dabbelt , Palmer Dabbelt , Paul Walmsley , Albert Ou , Jonathan Corbet , Alexander Graf , Atish Patra , Alistair Francis , Damien Le Moal , KVM General , kvm-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-riscv , linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List" , linux-staging@lists.linux.dev References: <20210519033553.1110536-1-anup.patel@wdc.com> From: Paolo Bonzini Subject: Re: [PATCH v18 00/18] KVM RISC-V Support Message-ID: Date: Wed, 19 May 2021 13:18:44 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.8.1 X-Mailing-List: linux-staging@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=pbonzini@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 19/05/21 12:47, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: >> It is not a dumping ground for stuff that arch maintainers can not seem >> to agree on, and it is not a place where you can just randomly play >> around with user/kernel apis with no consequences. >> >> So no, sorry, not going to take this code at all. > > And to be a bit more clear about this, having other subsystem > maintainers drop their unwanted code on this subsystem,_without_ even > asking me first is just not very nice. All of a sudden I am now > responsible for this stuff, without me even being asked about it. > Should I start throwing random drivers into the kvm subsystem for them > to maintain because I don't want to?:) (I did see the smiley), I'm on board with throwing random drivers in arch/riscv. :) The situation here didn't seem very far from what process/2.Process.rst says about staging: - "a way to keep track of drivers that aren't up to standards", though in this case the issue is not coding standards or quality---the code is very good---and which people "may want to use" - the code could be removed if there's no progress on either changing the RISC-V acceptance policy or ratifying the spec Of course there should have been a TODO file explaining the situation. But if you think this is not the right place, I totally understand; if my opinion had any weight in this, I would just place it in arch/riscv/kvm. The RISC-V acceptance policy as is just doesn't work, and the fact that people are trying to work around it is proving it. There are many ways to improve it: - get rid of it; - provide a path to get an exception; - provide a staging place sot hat people to do their job of contributing code to Linux (e.g. arch/riscv/staging/kvm). If everything else fail, I guess we can place it in drivers/virt/riscv/kvm, even though that's just as silly a workaround. It's a pity because the RISC-V virtualization architecture has a very nice design, and the KVM code is also a very good example of how to do things right. Paolo > If there's really no other way to do this, than to put it in staging, > let's talk about it. But saying "this must go here" is not a > conversation...