From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.4 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FCE9C10F14 for ; Thu, 3 Oct 2019 09:53:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6071921A4C for ; Thu, 3 Oct 2019 09:53:12 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=oracle.com header.i=@oracle.com header.b="AsjiUbBH" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729671AbfJCJxL (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Oct 2019 05:53:11 -0400 Received: from aserp2120.oracle.com ([141.146.126.78]:40000 "EHLO aserp2120.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728812AbfJCJxK (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Oct 2019 05:53:10 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (aserp2120.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by aserp2120.oracle.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x939n7cB003263; Thu, 3 Oct 2019 09:51:27 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=oracle.com; h=subject : to : cc : references : from : message-id : date : mime-version : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding; s=corp-2019-08-05; bh=OGCsoYWUTAHGPkhKorSnO+N61wFEeMCh2U+hapf2L9Y=; b=AsjiUbBHCDlKLuYuC11WX7hHW8Az5zIEhG3Dwi19aST/2w8PkzqayVo0h4MGdH06HLs5 33QJbmEJ4qA4XUxqkS4j+8BR2HATBHSLjN+tDY9Q+Ar72ZMndoAXNYJgEa7gJC+4Aten /4I7C30qUXIj/8FeZEVVRTB4vC8FvWKI1HqRWv7YgCy7rzBfS86gFkvtpjFn4qfHYdox Mlt0zYpiJKsDsw7m96kDsRjbOyM6iCvOHkjmLYUOUMwvdnndmynMmnrhfRxrcRklC1Kb 5GfTUSCl/Jbqs3FalkU/BcpqQUgvvInWi6qGB0Vodq01XVMTscdKZ6k0fIZEq0WX6/W/ Aw== Received: from userp3030.oracle.com (userp3030.oracle.com [156.151.31.80]) by aserp2120.oracle.com with ESMTP id 2v9yfqjp0g-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 03 Oct 2019 09:51:27 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (userp3030.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by userp3030.oracle.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x939n1MW159306; Thu, 3 Oct 2019 09:51:26 GMT Received: from userv0121.oracle.com (userv0121.oracle.com [156.151.31.72]) by userp3030.oracle.com with ESMTP id 2vcg63a19k-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 03 Oct 2019 09:51:26 +0000 Received: from abhmp0014.oracle.com (abhmp0014.oracle.com [141.146.116.20]) by userv0121.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.13.8) with ESMTP id x939pCcs025867; Thu, 3 Oct 2019 09:51:12 GMT Received: from [10.191.0.240] (/10.191.0.240) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Thu, 03 Oct 2019 02:51:12 -0700 Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] KVM: X86: Add "nopvspin" parameter to disable PV spinlocks To: Sean Christopherson Cc: Vitaly Kuznetsov , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jonathan Corbet , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , Borislav Petkov , "H. Peter Anvin" , Paolo Bonzini , Radim Krcmar , Wanpeng Li , Jim Mattson , Joerg Roedel , Peter Zijlstra , Will Deacon References: <1569759666-26904-1-git-send-email-zhenzhong.duan@oracle.com> <1569759666-26904-2-git-send-email-zhenzhong.duan@oracle.com> <87pnjh3i6i.fsf@vitty.brq.redhat.com> <87eezw3lna.fsf@vitty.brq.redhat.com> <20191002164730.GA9615@linux.intel.com> From: Zhenzhong Duan Organization: Oracle Corporation Message-ID: <07f979cc-04b8-6901-b7b0-3e9f06655eb6@oracle.com> Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2019 17:51:07 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20191002164730.GA9615@linux.intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Language: en-US X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6000 definitions=9398 signatures=668685 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1908290000 definitions=main-1910030091 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6000 definitions=9398 signatures=668685 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1908290000 definitions=main-1910030091 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2019/10/3 0:47, Sean Christopherson wrote: > On Tue, Oct 01, 2019 at 05:47:00PM +0800, Zhenzhong Duan wrote: >> On 2019/10/1 16:39, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote: >>> Zhenzhong Duan writes: >>> >>>> On 2019/9/30 23:41, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote: >>>>> Zhenzhong Duan writes: >>>>> >>>>>> There are cases where a guest tries to switch spinlocks to bare metal >>>>>> behavior (e.g. by setting "xen_nopvspin" on XEN platform and >>>>>> "hv_nopvspin" on HYPER_V). >>>>>> >>>>>> That feature is missed on KVM, add a new parameter "nopvspin" to disable >>>>>> PV spinlocks for KVM guest. >>>>>> >>>>>> This new parameter is also intended to replace "xen_nopvspin" and >>>>>> "hv_nopvspin" in the future. >>>>> Any reason to not do it right now? We will probably need to have compat >>>>> code to support xen_nopvspin/hv_nopvspin too but emit a 'is deprecated' >>>>> warning. >>>> Sorry the description isn't clear, I'll fix it. >>>> >>>> I did the compat work in the other two patches. >>>> [PATCH 2/3] xen: Mark "xen_nopvspin" parameter obsolete and map it to "nopvspin" >>>> [PATCH 3/3] x86/hyperv: Mark "hv_nopvspin" parameter obsolete and map it to "nopvspin" >>>> >>> For some reason I got CCed only on the first one and moreover, >> The three patches have different maintainers/reviewers by get_maintainer.pl, I added >> "Cc: maintainers/reviewers" to each patch then git-sendemail picked them automaticly. >> I meaned to not disturb maintainers with the field they aren't in charge of. It looks >> I'm wrong. >> >> So what's the correct way dealing with this? Should I send the whole patchset to all >> the maintainers/reviewers related to all the patches? > There's no one right answer to that question, folks have different > preferences. My general rule of thumb is to cc everyone on all patches > unless the series is obnoxiously large *and* isolated to a specific part > of the kernel. The idea being that people are more likely to be annoyed > if they can't find all patches in a relatively small series (this case) > than they are about receiving a mail or two that they don't care about. > > At a minimum I would cc everyone involved on the cover letter, and cc the > relevant mailing lists on all patches. Sending everyone the cover letter > provides people a quick overview of the patches they didn't receive, as > well as a starting point if they want to find those patches. Cc'ing the > mailing list(s) can make it even easier to find the patches. The cover > letter is also a good place to explain why you didn't cc everyone on all > patches (or vice versa). > > Also, the cover letter should have the shortlog and overall diffstats. > 'git format-patch --cover-letter' will do the work for you. Thanks for your detailed reply, I's clear to me what to do now. Zhenzhong