* Re: [PATCH RFC] MAINTAINERS: split out s390x sections
2021-12-20 11:54 [PATCH RFC] MAINTAINERS: split out s390x sections Cornelia Huck
@ 2021-12-20 17:31 ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2021-12-20 19:27 ` David Hildenbrand
` (3 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé @ 2021-12-20 17:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Cornelia Huck, qemu-devel, qemu-s390x
Cc: Thomas Huth, David Hildenbrand, Richard Henderson, Eric Farman,
Halil Pasic, Christian Borntraeger
On 12/20/21 12:54, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> Split out some more specialized devices etc., so that we can build
> smarter lists of people to be put on cc: in the future.
>
> Signed-off-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>
> ---
>
> As discussed offlist. Some notes:
> - The new sections have inherited the maintainers of the sections
> they have been split out of (except where people had already
> volunteered). That's easy to change, obviously, and I hope that
> the cc: list already contains people who might have interest in
> volunteering for some sections.
> - I may not have gotten the F: patterns correct, please double check.
> - I'm also not sure about where in the MAINTAINERS file the new
> sections should go; if you have a better idea, please speak up.
> - Also, if you have better ideas regarding the sections, please
> speak up as well :)
> - Pull requests will probably continue the same way as now (i.e.
> patches picked up at the top level and then sent, except for some
> things like tcg which may go separately.) Not sure if it would
> make sense to try out the submaintainer pull request model again,
> I don't think it made life easier in the past, and now we have
> the b4 tool to pick patches easily anyway. It might be a good
> idea to check which of the tree locations should stay, or if we
> want to have new ones.
>
> ---
> MAINTAINERS | 86 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
> 1 file changed, 75 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
Reviewed-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@redhat.com>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH RFC] MAINTAINERS: split out s390x sections
2021-12-20 11:54 [PATCH RFC] MAINTAINERS: split out s390x sections Cornelia Huck
2021-12-20 17:31 ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
@ 2021-12-20 19:27 ` David Hildenbrand
2021-12-21 9:44 ` Christian Borntraeger
` (2 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: David Hildenbrand @ 2021-12-20 19:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Cornelia Huck, qemu-devel, qemu-s390x
Cc: Halil Pasic, Thomas Huth, Christian Borntraeger,
Richard Henderson, Eric Farman
On 20.12.21 12:54, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> Split out some more specialized devices etc., so that we can build
> smarter lists of people to be put on cc: in the future.
>
> Signed-off-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>
> ---
>
> As discussed offlist. Some notes:
> - The new sections have inherited the maintainers of the sections
> they have been split out of (except where people had already
> volunteered). That's easy to change, obviously, and I hope that
> the cc: list already contains people who might have interest in
> volunteering for some sections.
> - I may not have gotten the F: patterns correct, please double check.
> - I'm also not sure about where in the MAINTAINERS file the new
> sections should go; if you have a better idea, please speak up.
> - Also, if you have better ideas regarding the sections, please
> speak up as well :)
> - Pull requests will probably continue the same way as now (i.e.
> patches picked up at the top level and then sent, except for some
> things like tcg which may go separately.) Not sure if it would
> make sense to try out the submaintainer pull request model again,
> I don't think it made life easier in the past, and now we have
> the b4 tool to pick patches easily anyway. It might be a good
> idea to check which of the tree locations should stay, or if we
> want to have new ones.
>
> ---
> MAINTAINERS | 86 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
> 1 file changed, 75 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
> index 9a8d1bdf727d..d1916f075386 100644
> --- a/MAINTAINERS
> +++ b/MAINTAINERS
> @@ -297,7 +297,6 @@ M: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
> S: Maintained
> F: target/s390x/
> F: target/s390x/tcg
> -F: target/s390x/cpu_models_*.[ch]
> F: hw/s390x/
> F: disas/s390.c
> F: tests/tcg/s390x/
> @@ -396,16 +395,10 @@ M: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
> M: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>
> S: Supported
> F: target/s390x/kvm/
> -F: target/s390x/ioinst.[ch]
> F: target/s390x/machine.c
> F: target/s390x/sigp.c
> -F: target/s390x/cpu_features*.[ch]
> -F: target/s390x/cpu_models.[ch]
> F: hw/s390x/pv.c
> F: include/hw/s390x/pv.h
> -F: hw/intc/s390_flic.c
> -F: hw/intc/s390_flic_kvm.c
> -F: include/hw/s390x/s390_flic.h
> F: gdb-xml/s390*.xml
> T: git https://github.com/borntraeger/qemu.git s390-next
> L: qemu-s390x@nongnu.org
> @@ -1529,12 +1522,8 @@ S390 Virtio-ccw
> M: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
> M: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>
> S: Supported
> -F: hw/char/sclp*.[hc]
> -F: hw/char/terminal3270.c
> F: hw/s390x/
> F: include/hw/s390x/
> -F: hw/watchdog/wdt_diag288.c
> -F: include/hw/watchdog/wdt_diag288.h
> F: configs/devices/s390x-softmmu/default.mak
> F: tests/avocado/machine_s390_ccw_virtio.py
> T: git https://github.com/borntraeger/qemu.git s390-next
> @@ -1559,6 +1548,80 @@ F: hw/s390x/s390-pci*
> F: include/hw/s390x/s390-pci*
> L: qemu-s390x@nongnu.org
>
> +S390 channel subsystem
> +M: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
> +M: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>
> +S: Supported
> +F: hw/s390x/ccw-device.[ch]
> +F: hw/s390x/css.c
> +F: hw/s390x/css-bridge.c
> +F: include/hw/s390x/css.h
> +F: include/hw/s390x/css-bridge.h
> +F: include/hw/s390x/ioinst.h
> +F: target/s390x/ioinst.c
> +L: qemu-s390x@nongnu.org
> +
> +3270 device
> +M: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
> +M: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>
> +S: Odd fixes
> +F: include/hw/s390x/3270-ccw.h
> +F: hw/char/terminal3270.c
> +F: hw/s390x/3270-ccw.c
> +L: qemu-s390x@nongnu.org
> +
> +diag 288 watchdog
> +M: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
> +M: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>
> +S: Supported
> +F: hw/watchdog/wdt_diag288.c
> +F: include/hw/watchdog/wdt_diag288.h
> +L: qemu-s390x@nongnu.org
> +
> +S390 CPU models
> +M: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
> +S: Maintained
> +F: target/s390x/cpu_features*.[ch]
> +F: target/s390x/cpu_models.[ch]
> +L: qemu-s390x@nongnu.org
> +
> +S390 storage key device
> +M: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
> +M: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>
> +S: Supported
> +F: hw/s390x/storage-keys.h
> +F: hw/390x/s390-skeys*.c
> +L: qemu-s390x@nongnu.org
> +
> +S390 storage attribute device
> +M: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
> +M: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>
> +S: Supported
> +F: hw/s390x/storage-attributes.h
> +F: hw/s390/s390-stattrib*.c
> +L: qemu-s390x@nongnu.org
> +
> +S390 SCLP-backed devices
> +M: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
> +M: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>
> +S: Supported
> +F: include/hw/s390x/event-facility.h
> +F: include/hw/s390x/sclp.h
> +F: hw/char/sclp*.[hc]
> +F: hw/s390x/event-facility.c
> +F: hw/s390x/sclp*.c
> +L: qemu-s390x@nongnu.org
> +
> +S390 floating interrupt controller
> +M: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
> +M: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>
> +M: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
> +S: Supported
> +F: hw/intc/s390_flic.c
> +F: hw/intc/s390_flic_kvm.c
> +F: include/hw/s390x/s390_flic.h
> +L: qemu-s390x@nongnu.org
> +
> X86 Machines
> ------------
> PC
> @@ -1957,6 +2020,7 @@ M: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
> S: Supported
> F: hw/s390x/virtio-ccw*.[hc]
> F: hw/s390x/vhost-vsock-ccw.c
> +F: hw/s390x/vhost-user-fs-ccw.c
> T: git https://gitlab.com/cohuck/qemu.git s390-next
> T: git https://github.com/borntraeger/qemu.git s390-next
> L: qemu-s390x@nongnu.org
Acked-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
--
Thanks,
David / dhildenb
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH RFC] MAINTAINERS: split out s390x sections
2021-12-20 11:54 [PATCH RFC] MAINTAINERS: split out s390x sections Cornelia Huck
2021-12-20 17:31 ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2021-12-20 19:27 ` David Hildenbrand
@ 2021-12-21 9:44 ` Christian Borntraeger
2021-12-21 10:09 ` Thomas Huth
2021-12-21 14:14 ` Halil Pasic
4 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Christian Borntraeger @ 2021-12-21 9:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Cornelia Huck, qemu-devel, qemu-s390x
Cc: Halil Pasic, Thomas Huth, Richard Henderson, Eric Farman,
David Hildenbrand
Am 20.12.21 um 12:54 schrieb Cornelia Huck:
> Split out some more specialized devices etc., so that we can build
> smarter lists of people to be put on cc: in the future.
>
> Signed-off-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>
Acked-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
That should help to get additional maintainers (in add-on patches) added.
Letsa go with this split - we can fix and improve things anytime.
> ---
>
> As discussed offlist. Some notes:
> - The new sections have inherited the maintainers of the sections
> they have been split out of (except where people had already
> volunteered). That's easy to change, obviously, and I hope that
> the cc: list already contains people who might have interest in
> volunteering for some sections.
> - I may not have gotten the F: patterns correct, please double check.
> - I'm also not sure about where in the MAINTAINERS file the new
> sections should go; if you have a better idea, please speak up.
> - Also, if you have better ideas regarding the sections, please
> speak up as well :)
> - Pull requests will probably continue the same way as now (i.e.
> patches picked up at the top level and then sent, except for some
> things like tcg which may go separately.) Not sure if it would
> make sense to try out the submaintainer pull request model again,
> I don't think it made life easier in the past, and now we have
> the b4 tool to pick patches easily anyway. It might be a good
> idea to check which of the tree locations should stay, or if we
> want to have new ones.
>
> ---
> MAINTAINERS | 86 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
> 1 file changed, 75 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
> index 9a8d1bdf727d..d1916f075386 100644
> --- a/MAINTAINERS
> +++ b/MAINTAINERS
> @@ -297,7 +297,6 @@ M: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
> S: Maintained
> F: target/s390x/
> F: target/s390x/tcg
> -F: target/s390x/cpu_models_*.[ch]
> F: hw/s390x/
> F: disas/s390.c
> F: tests/tcg/s390x/
> @@ -396,16 +395,10 @@ M: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
> M: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>
> S: Supported
> F: target/s390x/kvm/
> -F: target/s390x/ioinst.[ch]
> F: target/s390x/machine.c
> F: target/s390x/sigp.c
> -F: target/s390x/cpu_features*.[ch]
> -F: target/s390x/cpu_models.[ch]
> F: hw/s390x/pv.c
> F: include/hw/s390x/pv.h
> -F: hw/intc/s390_flic.c
> -F: hw/intc/s390_flic_kvm.c
> -F: include/hw/s390x/s390_flic.h
> F: gdb-xml/s390*.xml
> T: git https://github.com/borntraeger/qemu.git s390-next
> L: qemu-s390x@nongnu.org
> @@ -1529,12 +1522,8 @@ S390 Virtio-ccw
> M: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
> M: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>
> S: Supported
> -F: hw/char/sclp*.[hc]
> -F: hw/char/terminal3270.c
> F: hw/s390x/
> F: include/hw/s390x/
> -F: hw/watchdog/wdt_diag288.c
> -F: include/hw/watchdog/wdt_diag288.h
> F: configs/devices/s390x-softmmu/default.mak
> F: tests/avocado/machine_s390_ccw_virtio.py
> T: git https://github.com/borntraeger/qemu.git s390-next
> @@ -1559,6 +1548,80 @@ F: hw/s390x/s390-pci*
> F: include/hw/s390x/s390-pci*
> L: qemu-s390x@nongnu.org
>
> +S390 channel subsystem
> +M: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
> +M: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>
> +S: Supported
> +F: hw/s390x/ccw-device.[ch]
> +F: hw/s390x/css.c
> +F: hw/s390x/css-bridge.c
> +F: include/hw/s390x/css.h
> +F: include/hw/s390x/css-bridge.h
> +F: include/hw/s390x/ioinst.h
> +F: target/s390x/ioinst.c
> +L: qemu-s390x@nongnu.org
> +
> +3270 device
> +M: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
> +M: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>
> +S: Odd fixes
> +F: include/hw/s390x/3270-ccw.h
> +F: hw/char/terminal3270.c
> +F: hw/s390x/3270-ccw.c
> +L: qemu-s390x@nongnu.org
> +
> +diag 288 watchdog
> +M: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
> +M: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>
> +S: Supported
> +F: hw/watchdog/wdt_diag288.c
> +F: include/hw/watchdog/wdt_diag288.h
> +L: qemu-s390x@nongnu.org
> +
> +S390 CPU models
> +M: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
> +S: Maintained
> +F: target/s390x/cpu_features*.[ch]
> +F: target/s390x/cpu_models.[ch]
> +L: qemu-s390x@nongnu.org
> +
> +S390 storage key device
> +M: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
> +M: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>
> +S: Supported
> +F: hw/s390x/storage-keys.h
> +F: hw/390x/s390-skeys*.c
> +L: qemu-s390x@nongnu.org
> +
> +S390 storage attribute device
> +M: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
> +M: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>
> +S: Supported
> +F: hw/s390x/storage-attributes.h
> +F: hw/s390/s390-stattrib*.c
> +L: qemu-s390x@nongnu.org
> +
> +S390 SCLP-backed devices
> +M: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
> +M: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>
> +S: Supported
> +F: include/hw/s390x/event-facility.h
> +F: include/hw/s390x/sclp.h
> +F: hw/char/sclp*.[hc]
> +F: hw/s390x/event-facility.c
> +F: hw/s390x/sclp*.c
> +L: qemu-s390x@nongnu.org
> +
> +S390 floating interrupt controller
> +M: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
> +M: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>
> +M: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
> +S: Supported
> +F: hw/intc/s390_flic.c
> +F: hw/intc/s390_flic_kvm.c
> +F: include/hw/s390x/s390_flic.h
> +L: qemu-s390x@nongnu.org
> +
> X86 Machines
> ------------
> PC
> @@ -1957,6 +2020,7 @@ M: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
> S: Supported
> F: hw/s390x/virtio-ccw*.[hc]
> F: hw/s390x/vhost-vsock-ccw.c
> +F: hw/s390x/vhost-user-fs-ccw.c
> T: git https://gitlab.com/cohuck/qemu.git s390-next
> T: git https://github.com/borntraeger/qemu.git s390-next
> L: qemu-s390x@nongnu.org
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH RFC] MAINTAINERS: split out s390x sections
2021-12-20 11:54 [PATCH RFC] MAINTAINERS: split out s390x sections Cornelia Huck
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2021-12-21 9:44 ` Christian Borntraeger
@ 2021-12-21 10:09 ` Thomas Huth
2021-12-21 16:11 ` Cornelia Huck
2021-12-21 14:14 ` Halil Pasic
4 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Huth @ 2021-12-21 10:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Cornelia Huck, qemu-devel, qemu-s390x
Cc: Halil Pasic, Eric Farman, Christian Borntraeger,
Richard Henderson, David Hildenbrand
On 20/12/2021 12.54, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> Split out some more specialized devices etc., so that we can build
> smarter lists of people to be put on cc: in the future.
>
> Signed-off-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>
> ---
>
> As discussed offlist. Some notes:
> - The new sections have inherited the maintainers of the sections
> they have been split out of (except where people had already
> volunteered). That's easy to change, obviously, and I hope that
> the cc: list already contains people who might have interest in
> volunteering for some sections.
> - I may not have gotten the F: patterns correct, please double check.
> - I'm also not sure about where in the MAINTAINERS file the new
> sections should go; if you have a better idea, please speak up.
> - Also, if you have better ideas regarding the sections, please
> speak up as well :)
> - Pull requests will probably continue the same way as now (i.e.
> patches picked up at the top level and then sent, except for some
> things like tcg which may go separately.) Not sure if it would
> make sense to try out the submaintainer pull request model again,
> I don't think it made life easier in the past, and now we have
> the b4 tool to pick patches easily anyway. It might be a good
> idea to check which of the tree locations should stay, or if we
> want to have new ones.
>
> ---
> MAINTAINERS | 86 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
> 1 file changed, 75 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
> index 9a8d1bdf727d..d1916f075386 100644
> --- a/MAINTAINERS
> +++ b/MAINTAINERS
> @@ -297,7 +297,6 @@ M: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
> S: Maintained
> F: target/s390x/
> F: target/s390x/tcg
> -F: target/s390x/cpu_models_*.[ch]
> F: hw/s390x/
> F: disas/s390.c
> F: tests/tcg/s390x/
> @@ -396,16 +395,10 @@ M: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
> M: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>
> S: Supported
> F: target/s390x/kvm/
> -F: target/s390x/ioinst.[ch]
> F: target/s390x/machine.c
> F: target/s390x/sigp.c
> -F: target/s390x/cpu_features*.[ch]
> -F: target/s390x/cpu_models.[ch]
> F: hw/s390x/pv.c
> F: include/hw/s390x/pv.h
> -F: hw/intc/s390_flic.c
> -F: hw/intc/s390_flic_kvm.c
> -F: include/hw/s390x/s390_flic.h
> F: gdb-xml/s390*.xml
> T: git https://github.com/borntraeger/qemu.git s390-next
> L: qemu-s390x@nongnu.org
> @@ -1529,12 +1522,8 @@ S390 Virtio-ccw
> M: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
> M: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>
> S: Supported
> -F: hw/char/sclp*.[hc]
> -F: hw/char/terminal3270.c
> F: hw/s390x/
> F: include/hw/s390x/
> -F: hw/watchdog/wdt_diag288.c
> -F: include/hw/watchdog/wdt_diag288.h
> F: configs/devices/s390x-softmmu/default.mak
> F: tests/avocado/machine_s390_ccw_virtio.py
> T: git https://github.com/borntraeger/qemu.git s390-next
> @@ -1559,6 +1548,80 @@ F: hw/s390x/s390-pci*
> F: include/hw/s390x/s390-pci*
> L: qemu-s390x@nongnu.org
>
> +S390 channel subsystem
> +M: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
> +M: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>
> +S: Supported
> +F: hw/s390x/ccw-device.[ch]
> +F: hw/s390x/css.c
> +F: hw/s390x/css-bridge.c
> +F: include/hw/s390x/css.h
> +F: include/hw/s390x/css-bridge.h
> +F: include/hw/s390x/ioinst.h
> +F: target/s390x/ioinst.c
> +L: qemu-s390x@nongnu.org
> +
> +3270 device
> +M: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
> +M: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>
> +S: Odd fixes
> +F: include/hw/s390x/3270-ccw.h
> +F: hw/char/terminal3270.c
> +F: hw/s390x/3270-ccw.c
> +L: qemu-s390x@nongnu.org
I'm a little bit torn between putting the s390x-related devices here in the
"Machine" section (which should rather be used for machines and not for
devices), or in the more generic "Devices" section later in the MAINTAINERS
file. We already have vfio-ccw and vfio-ap in the "Devices" section, so
maybe we should put the other s390x-related devices there as well? (maybe
with a "s390x" prefix so that they show up in the same spot if we sort them
alphabetically?)
> +diag 288 watchdog
> +M: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
> +M: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>
> +S: Supported
> +F: hw/watchdog/wdt_diag288.c
> +F: include/hw/watchdog/wdt_diag288.h
> +L: qemu-s390x@nongnu.org
> +
> +S390 CPU models
> +M: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
> +S: Maintained
> +F: target/s390x/cpu_features*.[ch]
> +F: target/s390x/cpu_models.[ch]
> +L: qemu-s390x@nongnu.org
> +
> +S390 storage key device
> +M: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
> +M: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>
> +S: Supported
> +F: hw/s390x/storage-keys.h
> +F: hw/390x/s390-skeys*.c
> +L: qemu-s390x@nongnu.org
> +
> +S390 storage attribute device
> +M: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
> +M: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>
> +S: Supported
> +F: hw/s390x/storage-attributes.h
> +F: hw/s390/s390-stattrib*.c
> +L: qemu-s390x@nongnu.org
> +
> +S390 SCLP-backed devices
> +M: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
> +M: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>
> +S: Supported
> +F: include/hw/s390x/event-facility.h
> +F: include/hw/s390x/sclp.h
> +F: hw/char/sclp*.[hc]
> +F: hw/s390x/event-facility.c
> +F: hw/s390x/sclp*.c
> +L: qemu-s390x@nongnu.org
> +
> +S390 floating interrupt controller
> +M: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
> +M: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>
> +M: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
> +S: Supported
> +F: hw/intc/s390_flic.c
> +F: hw/intc/s390_flic_kvm.c
The above two lines could be shortened to:
F: hw/intc/s390_flic*.c
> +F: include/hw/s390x/s390_flic.h
> +L: qemu-s390x@nongnu.org
> +
> X86 Machines
> ------------
> PC
> @@ -1957,6 +2020,7 @@ M: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
> S: Supported
> F: hw/s390x/virtio-ccw*.[hc]
> F: hw/s390x/vhost-vsock-ccw.c
> +F: hw/s390x/vhost-user-fs-ccw.c
> T: git https://gitlab.com/cohuck/qemu.git s390-next
> T: git https://github.com/borntraeger/qemu.git s390-next
> L: qemu-s390x@nongnu.org
I'm also fine with this patch without further modifications, so:
Acked-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH RFC] MAINTAINERS: split out s390x sections
2021-12-21 10:09 ` Thomas Huth
@ 2021-12-21 16:11 ` Cornelia Huck
2021-12-22 9:33 ` Halil Pasic
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Cornelia Huck @ 2021-12-21 16:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Thomas Huth, qemu-devel, qemu-s390x
Cc: Halil Pasic, Eric Farman, Christian Borntraeger,
Richard Henderson, David Hildenbrand
On Tue, Dec 21 2021, Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 20/12/2021 12.54, Cornelia Huck wrote:
>> Split out some more specialized devices etc., so that we can build
>> smarter lists of people to be put on cc: in the future.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>
>> ---
>>
>> As discussed offlist. Some notes:
>> - The new sections have inherited the maintainers of the sections
>> they have been split out of (except where people had already
>> volunteered). That's easy to change, obviously, and I hope that
>> the cc: list already contains people who might have interest in
>> volunteering for some sections.
>> - I may not have gotten the F: patterns correct, please double check.
>> - I'm also not sure about where in the MAINTAINERS file the new
>> sections should go; if you have a better idea, please speak up.
>> - Also, if you have better ideas regarding the sections, please
>> speak up as well :)
>> - Pull requests will probably continue the same way as now (i.e.
>> patches picked up at the top level and then sent, except for some
>> things like tcg which may go separately.) Not sure if it would
>> make sense to try out the submaintainer pull request model again,
>> I don't think it made life easier in the past, and now we have
>> the b4 tool to pick patches easily anyway. It might be a good
>> idea to check which of the tree locations should stay, or if we
>> want to have new ones.
>>
>> ---
>> MAINTAINERS | 86 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
>> 1 file changed, 75 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
>> index 9a8d1bdf727d..d1916f075386 100644
>> --- a/MAINTAINERS
>> +++ b/MAINTAINERS
>> @@ -297,7 +297,6 @@ M: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
>> S: Maintained
>> F: target/s390x/
>> F: target/s390x/tcg
>> -F: target/s390x/cpu_models_*.[ch]
>> F: hw/s390x/
>> F: disas/s390.c
>> F: tests/tcg/s390x/
>> @@ -396,16 +395,10 @@ M: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
>> M: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>
>> S: Supported
>> F: target/s390x/kvm/
>> -F: target/s390x/ioinst.[ch]
>> F: target/s390x/machine.c
>> F: target/s390x/sigp.c
>> -F: target/s390x/cpu_features*.[ch]
>> -F: target/s390x/cpu_models.[ch]
>> F: hw/s390x/pv.c
>> F: include/hw/s390x/pv.h
>> -F: hw/intc/s390_flic.c
>> -F: hw/intc/s390_flic_kvm.c
>> -F: include/hw/s390x/s390_flic.h
>> F: gdb-xml/s390*.xml
>> T: git https://github.com/borntraeger/qemu.git s390-next
>> L: qemu-s390x@nongnu.org
>> @@ -1529,12 +1522,8 @@ S390 Virtio-ccw
>> M: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
>> M: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>
>> S: Supported
>> -F: hw/char/sclp*.[hc]
>> -F: hw/char/terminal3270.c
>> F: hw/s390x/
>> F: include/hw/s390x/
>> -F: hw/watchdog/wdt_diag288.c
>> -F: include/hw/watchdog/wdt_diag288.h
>> F: configs/devices/s390x-softmmu/default.mak
>> F: tests/avocado/machine_s390_ccw_virtio.py
>> T: git https://github.com/borntraeger/qemu.git s390-next
>> @@ -1559,6 +1548,80 @@ F: hw/s390x/s390-pci*
>> F: include/hw/s390x/s390-pci*
>> L: qemu-s390x@nongnu.org
>>
>> +S390 channel subsystem
>> +M: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
>> +M: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>
>> +S: Supported
>> +F: hw/s390x/ccw-device.[ch]
>> +F: hw/s390x/css.c
>> +F: hw/s390x/css-bridge.c
>> +F: include/hw/s390x/css.h
>> +F: include/hw/s390x/css-bridge.h
>> +F: include/hw/s390x/ioinst.h
>> +F: target/s390x/ioinst.c
>> +L: qemu-s390x@nongnu.org
>> +
>> +3270 device
>> +M: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
>> +M: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>
>> +S: Odd fixes
>> +F: include/hw/s390x/3270-ccw.h
>> +F: hw/char/terminal3270.c
>> +F: hw/s390x/3270-ccw.c
>> +L: qemu-s390x@nongnu.org
>
> I'm a little bit torn between putting the s390x-related devices here in the
> "Machine" section (which should rather be used for machines and not for
> devices), or in the more generic "Devices" section later in the MAINTAINERS
> file. We already have vfio-ccw and vfio-ap in the "Devices" section, so
> maybe we should put the other s390x-related devices there as well? (maybe
> with a "s390x" prefix so that they show up in the same spot if we sort them
> alphabetically?)
We also have virtio-ccw there already. (I'm not sure whether the
"Devices" section is actually supposed to be ordered alphabetically; if
it is, I think it would need some reordering effort.)
For clarity, we could still add an S390 prefix here...
>
>> +diag 288 watchdog
>> +M: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
>> +M: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>
>> +S: Supported
>> +F: hw/watchdog/wdt_diag288.c
>> +F: include/hw/watchdog/wdt_diag288.h
>> +L: qemu-s390x@nongnu.org
...and here.
>> +
>> +S390 CPU models
>> +M: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
>> +S: Maintained
>> +F: target/s390x/cpu_features*.[ch]
>> +F: target/s390x/cpu_models.[ch]
>> +L: qemu-s390x@nongnu.org
This one was hard to fit, because it spans tcg and kvm, so we should
probably keep it here.
>> +
>> +S390 storage key device
>> +M: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
>> +M: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>
>> +S: Supported
>> +F: hw/s390x/storage-keys.h
>> +F: hw/390x/s390-skeys*.c
>> +L: qemu-s390x@nongnu.org
>> +
>> +S390 storage attribute device
>> +M: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
>> +M: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>
>> +S: Supported
>> +F: hw/s390x/storage-attributes.h
>> +F: hw/s390/s390-stattrib*.c
>> +L: qemu-s390x@nongnu.org
These two could go to the devices section.
>> +
>> +S390 SCLP-backed devices
>> +M: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
>> +M: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>
>> +S: Supported
>> +F: include/hw/s390x/event-facility.h
>> +F: include/hw/s390x/sclp.h
>> +F: hw/char/sclp*.[hc]
>> +F: hw/s390x/event-facility.c
>> +F: hw/s390x/sclp*.c
>> +L: qemu-s390x@nongnu.org
I'd rather keep this one here, as it contains not only the console
devices, but also the whole infrastructure. (Hmm, maybe call this
"devices and infrastructure"? </bikeshed>)
>> +
>> +S390 floating interrupt controller
>> +M: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
>> +M: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>
>> +M: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
>> +S: Supported
>> +F: hw/intc/s390_flic.c
>> +F: hw/intc/s390_flic_kvm.c
>
> The above two lines could be shortened to:
>
> F: hw/intc/s390_flic*.c
Yeah, this was simple cut-and-paste :)
(This section could also move.)
>
>> +F: include/hw/s390x/s390_flic.h
>> +L: qemu-s390x@nongnu.org
>> +
>> X86 Machines
>> ------------
>> PC
>> @@ -1957,6 +2020,7 @@ M: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
>> S: Supported
>> F: hw/s390x/virtio-ccw*.[hc]
>> F: hw/s390x/vhost-vsock-ccw.c
>> +F: hw/s390x/vhost-user-fs-ccw.c
>> T: git https://gitlab.com/cohuck/qemu.git s390-next
>> T: git https://github.com/borntraeger/qemu.git s390-next
>> L: qemu-s390x@nongnu.org
>
> I'm also fine with this patch without further modifications, so:
>
> Acked-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>
Thanks!
Any objections if I move the sections as outlined above and keep the
acks I already have?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH RFC] MAINTAINERS: split out s390x sections
2021-12-21 16:11 ` Cornelia Huck
@ 2021-12-22 9:33 ` Halil Pasic
0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Halil Pasic @ 2021-12-22 9:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Cornelia Huck
Cc: Thomas Huth, David Hildenbrand, Eric Farman, Richard Henderson,
qemu-devel, Halil Pasic, qemu-s390x, Christian Borntraeger
On Tue, 21 Dec 2021 17:11:58 +0100
Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com> wrote:
> Any objections if I move the sections as outlined above and keep the
> acks I already have?
No objections here!
Regards,
Halil
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH RFC] MAINTAINERS: split out s390x sections
2021-12-20 11:54 [PATCH RFC] MAINTAINERS: split out s390x sections Cornelia Huck
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2021-12-21 10:09 ` Thomas Huth
@ 2021-12-21 14:14 ` Halil Pasic
4 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Halil Pasic @ 2021-12-21 14:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Cornelia Huck
Cc: Thomas Huth, David Hildenbrand, Richard Henderson, Eric Farman,
qemu-devel, Halil Pasic, qemu-s390x, Christian Borntraeger
On Mon, 20 Dec 2021 12:54:19 +0100
Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com> wrote:
> Split out some more specialized devices etc., so that we can build
> smarter lists of people to be put on cc: in the future.
>
> Signed-off-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>
LGTM
Acked-by: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread