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=-3.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS 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 16966C433FE for ; Thu, 10 Dec 2020 15:34:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 623D623C81 for ; Thu, 10 Dec 2020 15:34:26 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 623D623C81 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:47904 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1knNxZ-0007Le-8l for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Thu, 10 Dec 2020 10:34:25 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:53236) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1knNvk-0006T1-HC for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 10 Dec 2020 10:32:32 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([63.128.21.124]:31664) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1knNvi-0004SM-7t for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 10 Dec 2020 10:32:32 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1607614348; 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: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=BFalo29qSLy8DQe8EkVZs6ZGryjzoPVQuyeNw4bDas0=; b=WCgPs7R8FkwaZqaltRlyILmAqGdrsQgbPD2gwtqZLdCaOV08WF4mARFL2QtanKI57K5JnD q2uzpWZW4ocjwk5pRurRPlxNGzdzbGryQzLpqikyaZhbin/7GJku8ffsw5PdMtaFVlFd2K OvhKNE+OsQW9zHHgX1RXxejymmknRQA= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-124-NXjEod8gPB6eVM42wJSBQQ-1; Thu, 10 Dec 2020 10:32:23 -0500 X-MC-Unique: NXjEod8gPB6eVM42wJSBQQ-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.15]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 894919CDC2; Thu, 10 Dec 2020 15:32:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (ovpn-113-62.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.113.62]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 714EB5D6D3; Thu, 10 Dec 2020 15:31:40 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2020 15:31:39 +0000 From: Stefan Hajnoczi To: Peter Maydell Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 00/19] Initial support for multi-process Qemu Message-ID: <20201210153139.GA490467@stefanha-x1.localdomain> References: <20201203091404.GA687169@stefanha-x1.localdomain> <20201210111355.GD416119@stefanha-x1.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.15 Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=stefanha@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="XsQoSWH+UP9D9v3l" Content-Disposition: inline Received-SPF: pass client-ip=63.128.21.124; envelope-from=stefanha@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Elena Ufimtseva , Fam Zheng , Swapnil Ingle , john.g.johnson@oracle.com, QEMU Developers , Gerd Hoffmann , Jagannathan Raman , Juan Quintela , "Michael S. Tsirkin" , Markus Armbruster , kanth.ghatraju@oracle.com, Felipe Franciosi , Thomas Huth , Eduardo Habkost , konrad.wilk@oracle.com, "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" , Alex Williamson , thanos.makatos@nutanix.com, Richard Henderson , Kevin Wolf , "Daniel P. Berrange" , Max Reitz , Ross Lagerwall , =?iso-8859-1?Q?Marc-Andr=E9?= Lureau , Paolo Bonzini Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" --XsQoSWH+UP9D9v3l Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 11:24:46AM +0000, Peter Maydell wrote: > On Thu, 10 Dec 2020 at 11:14, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote= : > > On Thu, Dec 03, 2020 at 08:40:11PM +0000, Peter Maydell wrote: > > > I would prefer to see this going through the tree of an > > > established QEMU developer who's already sending pullrequests, > > > at least initially. > > > > Once the discussion has completed I can send the patches in a pull > > request. > > > > I don't want to be the bottleneck for all multi-process QEMU patches in > > the future though. That's why I think the authors should be able to sen= d > > pull requests on their own after the initial code is merged. Much of > > this work is isolated an only affects multi-process QEMU and the featur= e > > is marked experimental. There is little risk of introducing instability > > for non-multi-process QEMU users/developers. Hence why this is a new > > subsystem and has MAINTAINERS files entries. >=20 > My reasoning is basically that new pull-request senders are more > work for me, because I have to make sure they have a GPG key set > up, and then examine pull requests pretty carefully to check they're > well-formed, all the sign-offs are correct, the changes aren't > touching areas of the codebase that they shouldn't, and so on. > That's particularly painful if the first pull request that comes > through is a massive one rather than "here's a small number of > patches with some bug fixes". Thanks for explaining. I will merge this series when review has finished and send you a pull request. Stefan --XsQoSWH+UP9D9v3l Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEEhpWov9P5fNqsNXdanKSrs4Grc8gFAl/SP1sACgkQnKSrs4Gr c8hw4gf6AsjUvjEjsUfQZf3VIzSAjXta3hpHyb7xJGsHaO/jYU5pA5MUnSfCTsIa KxDmQSrKdWQlf9xN6/dtlTVFPyAAECh4pSOGx7yC7nXAwtoGhNmIazrrpaVC8Dmi XeX9DKlDYMZBbaprvkX0Nku2i1nLdV0DsGMD20B/mZ3u0zVkam52coF6kI8EaZBV S4Wlf/97YOGgDgZh1Bk1aYsMUvWpuweFcJzM3+PQxHzbq1TeqjcChDlwZaDVhVCK GTx3PbHFd/94bABsrUZfNm/fzgECJZlf1XttEq/bSxPU4JlEhOb1siUVlylvVrmG 0dNa8jeTTJcA5w334ki0tGjijK/wzA== =6KF2 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --XsQoSWH+UP9D9v3l--