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 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D86E1C64EC4 for ; Fri, 17 Feb 2023 22:55:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229710AbjBQWzw (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Feb 2023 17:55:52 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:43934 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229477AbjBQWzu (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Feb 2023 17:55:50 -0500 Received: from mail-pj1-x1049.google.com (mail-pj1-x1049.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::1049]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A93D653ECA for ; Fri, 17 Feb 2023 14:55:47 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-pj1-x1049.google.com with SMTP id g20-20020a17090ace9400b0022bef1f49c9so828158pju.0 for ; Fri, 17 Feb 2023 14:55:47 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:from:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:in-reply-to:date:reply-to:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=xm/fq3q/qwW2g7tarVxxctkVjwQwEA/36kZhYB2MpuE=; b=HqFCqqvjQZiOd73iOpEE63eeoej0PEiM6LbBQexJQxJdCHL9dSTUlyJxWtAQPjeG84 +xmUzYNeTHqj8IYVaDR74lcgl+65VxccOIpNDFrt7cTJ330thkWh7L/zaYWOhgNW/4/L 9o/F2AN2LeAzybCBNZKCeaCxMKC0dDK0o4ORvdfZBKMlRJuNj2oWnY/ffDpDsZvQU+jJ i0pAsrMCXvjgv8RxItJUB/woKQZq0zVgPFnOtkefZmm7S8XUZhrFq5tWtJ/JpBClFVXy ZMKbQD+lmRQrG+e5E0n1yX4nzl8WOAe7HMkwAHV76LWfiRFxp6djLbnGU55LLqeZ7c3w cU5Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:from:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:in-reply-to:date:reply-to:x-gm-message-state:from:to :cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=xm/fq3q/qwW2g7tarVxxctkVjwQwEA/36kZhYB2MpuE=; b=y9/3wxojtVRrETAu1FKh/sW0ACJtNPcXpU08hThSgX5Kpzkni2yNBeMBBU6LIGPm0q L+1YNId2zLj6QhS5l7rS9Z4ZFbEshXx73DnWkFJC3gecwjXkma66+kJDFiFMHwjVd0i7 djX1f2+y0KOF7gpXEYJqYhkYL302sUgK0BGswXE0jBxM3Bn7CgrANexofDtKnD6fWw4N xnvf+7aLuZvkOJLuifcuGOwuk/ML4Tbs28gtwIY4joU8xH4O1uj9/xGWM7qm8bVs6kos 0ULnLAgOpcNyG00BKlEeUZ+t662xu4u2mAQBvt+aBHG4Zr/SCxDCGTG068GywloOfo6T n2aw== X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKXCJ6QrxRQQFqgLWPqPujZFRTwB6cn4zTGGIDtgefGPf7RMwUwG KLi7gfM/sUHwIPf6bejDA5hivjbo7js= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set9ubfgLbhycJGP0cyEjZjPBvyfAJI6giJerH6ec54kUVeqbI5CUQcT/oqga3z0DOa3d6XnxMHA+Uo4= X-Received: from zagreus.c.googlers.com ([fda3:e722:ac3:cc00:7f:e700:c0a8:5c37]) (user=seanjc job=sendgmr) by 2002:a17:90b:48c2:b0:233:ba2c:16a6 with SMTP id li2-20020a17090b48c200b00233ba2c16a6mr2068432pjb.109.1676674547051; Fri, 17 Feb 2023 14:55:47 -0800 (PST) Reply-To: Sean Christopherson Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2023 14:54:49 -0800 In-Reply-To: <20230217225449.811957-1-seanjc@google.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 References: <20230217225449.811957-1-seanjc@google.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.39.2.637.g21b0678d19-goog Message-ID: <20230217225449.811957-3-seanjc@google.com> Subject: [PATCH 2/2] Documentation/process: Add a maintainer handbook for KVM x86 From: Sean Christopherson To: Paolo Bonzini , Sean Christopherson Cc: Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , Borislav Petkov , Dave Hansen , Sagi Shahar , Erdem Aktas , Peter Shier , Anish Ghulati , Oliver Upton , James Houghton , Anish Moorthy , Ben Gardon , David Matlack , Ricardo Koller , Axel Rasmussen , Aaron Lewis , Ashish Kalra , Babu Moger , Chao Gao , Chao Peng , Chenyi Qiang , David Woodhouse , Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito , Gavin Shan , Guang Zeng , Hou Wenlong , Jiaxi Chen , Jim Mattson , Jing Liu , Junaid Shahid , Kai Huang , Leonardo Bras , Like Xu , Li RongQing , "Maciej S . Szmigiero" , Maxim Levitsky , Michael Roth , Michal Luczaj , Mingwei Zhang , Nikunj A Dadhania , Paul Durrant , Peng Hao , Peter Gonda , Peter Xu , Robert Hoo , Suravee Suthikulpanit , Tom Lendacky , Vipin Sharma , Vitaly Kuznetsov , Wanpeng Li , Wei Wang , Xiaoyao Li , Yu Zhang , Zhenzhong Duan , kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Add a KVM x86 doc to the subsystem/maintainer handbook section to explain how KVM x86 (currently) operates as a sub-subsystem, and to soapbox on the rules and expectations for contributing to KVM x86. Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson --- .../process/maintainer-handbooks.rst | 1 + Documentation/process/maintainer-kvm-x86.rst | 347 ++++++++++++++++++ MAINTAINERS | 1 + 3 files changed, 349 insertions(+) create mode 100644 Documentation/process/maintainer-kvm-x86.rst diff --git a/Documentation/process/maintainer-handbooks.rst b/Documentation= /process/maintainer-handbooks.rst index d783060b4cc6..d12cbbe2b7df 100644 --- a/Documentation/process/maintainer-handbooks.rst +++ b/Documentation/process/maintainer-handbooks.rst @@ -17,3 +17,4 @@ Contents: =20 maintainer-tip maintainer-netdev + maintainer-kvm-x86 diff --git a/Documentation/process/maintainer-kvm-x86.rst b/Documentation/p= rocess/maintainer-kvm-x86.rst new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..ac81a42a32a3 --- /dev/null +++ b/Documentation/process/maintainer-kvm-x86.rst @@ -0,0 +1,347 @@ +.. SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 + +KVM x86 +=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D + +TL;DR +----- +Testing is mandatory. Be consistent with established styles and patterns. + +Trees +----- +KVM x86 is currently in a transition period from being part of the main KV= M +tree, to being "just another KVM arch". As such, KVM x86 is split across = the +main KVM tree, ``git.kernel.org/pub/scm/virt/kvm/kvm.git``, and a KVM x86 +specific tree, ``github.com/kvm-x86/linux.git``. + +Generally speaking, fixes for the current cycle are applied directly to th= e +main KVM tree, while all development for the next cycle is routed through = the +KVM x86 tree. + +Note, this transition period is expected to last quite some time, i.e. wil= l be +the status quo for the foreseeable future. + +Branches +~~~~~~~~ +The KVM x86 tree is organized into multiple topic branches. The purpose o= f +using finer-grained topic branches is to make it easier to keep tabs on an= area +of development, and to limit the collateral damage of human errors and/or = buggy +commits, e.g. dropping the HEAD commit of a topic branch has no impact on = other +in-flight commits' SHA1 hashes, and having to reject a pull request due to= bugs +delays only that topic branch. + +All topic branches, except for ``next`` and ``fixes``, are rolled into ``n= ext`` +via a cthulu merge on an as-needed basis, i.e. when a topic branch is upda= ted. +As a result, force pushes to ``next`` are common. + +Lifecycle +~~~~~~~~~ +Pull requests for the next release cycle are sent to the main KVM tree, on= e +for each KVM x86 topic branch. If all goes well, the topic branches are r= olled +into the main KVM pull request sent during Linus' merge window. Pull requ= ests +for KVM x86 branches are typically made the week before Linus' opening of = the +merge window, e.g. the week following rc7 for "normal" releases. + +The KVM x86 tree doesn't have its own official merge window, but there's a= soft +close around rc5 for new features, and a soft close around rc6 for fixes. + +Timeline +~~~~~~~~ +Submissions are typically reviewed and applied in FIFO order, with some wi= ggle +room for the size of a series, patches that are "cache hot", etc. Fixes, +especially for the current release and or stable trees, get to jump the qu= eue. +Patches that will be taken through a non-KVM tree (most often through the = tip +tree) and/or have other acks/reviews also jump the queue to some extent. + +Note, the vast majority of review is done between rc1 and rc6, give or tak= e. +The period between rc6 and the next rc1 is used to catch up on other tasks= , +i.e. radio silence during this period isn't unusual. + +Pings to get a status update are welcome, but keep in mind the timing of t= he +current release cycle and have realistic expectations. If you are pinging= for +acceptance, i.e. not just for feedback or an update, please do everything = you +can, within reason, to ensure that your patches are ready to be merged! P= ings +on series that break the build or fail tests lead to unhappy maintainers! + +Development +----------- + +Base Tree/Branch +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ +Fixes that target mainline, i.e. the current release, should be based on +``git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/virt/kvm/kvm.git master``. + +Everything else should be based on a kvm-x86 topic branch. If there is no +obvious fit, use ``misc``. Unless a patch/series depends on and/or confli= cts +with multiple topic branches, do not use ``next`` as a base. Because ``ne= xt`` +is force-pushed on a regular basis, depending on when others fetch ``next`= `, +they may or may not have the relevant objects in their local git tree. + +Coding Style +~~~~~~~~~~~~ +When it comes to style, naming, patterns, etc., consistency is the number = one +priority in KVM x86. If all else fails, match what already exists. + +With a few caveats listed below, follow the tip tree maintainers' preferre= d +:ref:`maintainer-tip-coding-style`, as patches/series often touch both KVM= and +non-KVM x86 files, i.e. draw the attention of KVM *and* tip tree maintaine= rs. + +Using reverse fir tree for variable declarations isn't strictly required, +though it is still preferred. + +Except for a handful of special snowflakes, do not use kernel-doc comments= for +functions. The vast majority of "public" KVM functions aren't truly publi= c as +they are intended only for KVM-internal consumption (there are plans to +privatize KVM's headers and exports to enforce this). + +Comments +~~~~~~~~ +Write comments using imperative mood and avoid pronouns. Use comments to +provide a high level overview of the code, and/or to explain why the code = does +what it does. Do not reiterate what the code literally does; let the code +speak for itself. If the code itself is inscrutable, comments will not he= lp. + +SDM and APM References +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ +Much of KVM's code base is directly tied to architectural behavior defined= in +Intel's Software Development Manual (SDM) and AMD's Architecture Programme= r=E2=80=99s +Manual (APM). Use of "Intel's SDM" and "AMD's APM", or even just "SDM" or +"APM", without additional context is a-ok. + +Do not reference specific sections, tables, figures, etc. by number, espec= ially +not in comments. Instead, copy-paste the relevant snippet (if warranted),= and +reference sections/tables/figures by name. The layouts of the SDM and APM= are +constantly changing, and so the numbers/labels aren't stable/consistent. + +Generally speaking, do not copy-paste SDM or APM snippets into comments. = With +few exceptions, KVM *must* honor architectural behavior, therefore it's im= plied +that KVM behavior is emulating SDM and/or APM behavior. + +Shortlog +~~~~~~~~ +The preferred prefix format is ``KVM: :``, where ```` is one= of:: + + - x86 + - x86/mmu + - x86/pmu + - x86/xen + - selftests + - SVM + - nSVM + - VMX + - nVMX + +**DO NOT use x86/kvm!** ``x86/kvm`` is used exclusively for Linux-as-a-KV= M-guest +changes, i.e. for arch/x86/kernel/kvm.c. + +Note, these don't align with the topics branches (the topic branches care = much +more about code conflicts). + +All names are case sensitive! ``KVM: x86:`` is good, ``kvm: vmx:`` is not= . + +Capitalize the first word of the condensed patch description, but omit end= ing +punctionation. E.g.:: + + KVM: x86: Fix a null pointer dererence in function_xyz() + +not:: + + kvm: x86: fix a null pointer dererence in function_xyz. + +If a patch touches multiple topics, traverse up the conceptual tree to fin= d the +first common parent (which is often simply ``x86``). When in doubt, +``git log path/to/file`` should provide a reasonable hint. + +New topics do occasionally pop up, but please start an on-list discussion = if +you want to propose introducing a new topic, i.e. don't go rogue. + +Do not use file names or complete file paths as the subject/shortlog prefi= x. + +Changelog +~~~~~~~~~ +Write changelogs using imperative mood and avoid pronouns. Lead with a sh= ort +blurb on what is changing, and then follow up with the context and backgro= und. +Note! This order directly conflicts with the tip tree's preferred approac= h! + +Beyond personal preference, there are less subjective reasons for stating = what +a patch does before diving into details. First and foremost, what code is +actually being changed is the most important information, and so that info +should be easy to find. Changelogs that bury the "what's actually changin= g" in +a one-liner after 3+ paragraphs of background make it very hard to find th= at +information. + +For initial review, one could argue the "what's broken" is more important,= but +for skimming logs and git archaeology, the gory details matter less and le= ss. +E.g. when doing a series of "git blame", the details of each change along = the +way are useless, the details only matter for the culprit. Providing the "= what +changed" makes it easy to quickly determine whether or not a commit might = be of +interest. + +Another benefit of stating "what's changing" first is that it's almost alw= ays +possible to state "what's changing" in a single sentence. Conversely, all= but +the most simple bugs require multiple sentences or paragraphs to fully des= cribe +the problem. If both the "what's changing" and "what's the bug" are super +short then the order doesn't matter. But if one is shorter (almost always= the +"what's changing), then covering the shorter one first is advantageous bec= ause +it's less of an inconvenience for readers/reviewers that have a strict ord= ering +preference. E.g. having to skip one sentence to get to the context is les= s +painful than having to skip three paragraphs to get to "what's changing". + +Fixes +~~~~~ +If a change fixes a KVM/kernel bug, add a Fixes: tag even if the change do= esn't +need to be backported to stable kernels, and even if the change fixes a bu= g in +an older release. + +Conversely, if a fix does need to be backported, explicitly tag the patch = with +"Cc: stable@vger.kernel" (though the email itself doesn't need to Cc: stab= le); +KVM x86 opts out of backporting Fixes: by default. Some auto-selected pat= ches +do get backported, but require explicit maintainer approval (search MANUAL= SEL). + +Function References +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ +When a function is mentioned in a comment, changelog, or shortlog (or anyw= here +for that matter), use the format ``function_name()``. The parentheses pro= vide +context and disambiguate the reference. + +Testing +------- +At a bare minimum, *all* patches in a series must build cleanly for KVM_IN= TEL=3Dm +KVM_AMD=3Dm, and KVM_WERROR=3Dy. Building every possible combination of K= configs +isn't feasible, but the more the merrier. KVM_SMM, KVM_XEN, PROVE_LOCKING= , and +X86_64 are particularly interesting knobs to turn. + +Running KVM selftests and KVM-unit-tests is also mandatory (and stating th= e +obvious, the tests need to pass). When possible and relevant, testing on = both +Intel and AMD is strongly preferred. Booting an actual VM is encouraged, = but +not mandatory. + +For changes that touch KVM's shadow paging code, running with TDP (EPT/NPT= ) +disabled is mandatory. For changes that affect common KVM MMU code, runni= ng +with TDP disabled is strongly encouraged. For all other changes, if the c= ode +being modified depends on and/or interacts with a module param, testing wi= th +the relevant settings is mandatory. + +Note, KVM selftests and KVM-unit-tests do have known failures. If you sus= pect +a failure is not due to your changes, verify that the *exact same* failure +occurs with and without your changes. + +If you can't fully test a change, e.g. due to lack of hardware, clearly st= ate +what level of testing you were able to do, e.g. in the cover letter. + +New Features +~~~~~~~~~~~~ +With one exception, new features *must* come with test coverage. KVM spec= ific +tests aren't strictly required, e.g. if coverage is provided by running a +sufficiently enabled guest VM, or by running a related kernel selftest in = a VM, +but dedicated KVM tests are preferred in all cases. Negative testcases in +particular are mandatory for enabling of new hardware features as error an= d +exception flows are rarely exercised simply by running a VM. + +The only exception to this rule is if KVM is simply advertising support fo= r a +feature via KVM_SET_SUPPORTED_CPUID, i.e. for instructions/features that K= VM +can't prevent a guest from using and for which there is no true enabling. + +Note, "new features" does not just mean "new hardware features"! New feat= ures +that can't be well validated using existing KVM selftests and/or KVM-unit-= tests +must come with tests. + +Posting new feature development without tests to get early feedback is mor= e +than welcome, but such submissions should be tagged RFC, and the cover let= ter +should clearly state what type of feedback is requested/expected. Do not = abuse +the RFC process; RFCs will typically not receive in-depth review. + +Bug Fixes +~~~~~~~~~ +Except for "obvious" found-by-inspection bugs, fixes must be accompanied b= y a +reproducer for the bug being fixed. In many cases the reproducer is impli= cit, +e.g. for build errors and test failures, but it should still be clear to +readers what is broken and how to verify the fix. Some leeway is given fo= r +bugs that are found via non-public workloads/tests, but providing regressi= on +tests for such bugs is strongly preferred. + +In general, regression tests are preferred for any bug that is not trivial= to +hit. E.g. even if the bug was originally found by a fuzzer such as syzkal= ler, +a targeted regression test may be warranted if the bug requires hitting a +one-in-a-million type race condition. + +Note, KVM bugs are rarely urgent *and* non-trivial to reproduce. Ask your= self +if a bug is really truly the end of the world before posting a fix without= a +reproducer. + +Posting +------- + +Links +~~~~~ +Do not explicitly reference bug reports, prior versions of a patch/series,= etc. +via ``In-Reply-To:`` headers. Using ``In-Reply-To:`` becomes an unholy me= ss +for large series and/or when the version count gets high, and ``In-Reply-T= o:`` +is useless for anyone that doesn't have the original message, e.g. if some= one +wasn't Cc'd on the bug report or if the list of recipients changes between +versions. + +To link to a bug report, previous version, or anything of interest, use lo= re +links. For referencing previous version(s), generally speaking do not inc= lude +a Link: in the changelog as there is no need to record the history in git,= i.e. +put the link in the cover letter or in the section git ignores. Do provid= e a +formal Link: for bug reports and/or discussions that led to the patch. Th= e +context of why a change was made is highly valuable for future readers. + +Git Base +~~~~~~~~ +If you are using git version 2.9.0 or later (Googlers, this is all of you!= ), +use ``git format-patch`` with the ``--base`` flag to automatically include= the +base tree information in the generated patches. + +Note, ``--base=3Dauto`` works as expected if and only if a branch's upstre= am is +set to the base topic branch, e.g. it will do the wrong thing if your upst= ream +is set to your personal repository for backup purposes. An alternative "a= uto" +solution is to derive the names of your development branches based on thei= r +KVM x86 topic, and feed that into ``--base``. E.g. ``x86/pmu/my_branch_na= me``, +and then write a small wrapper to extract ``pmu`` from the current branch = name +to yield ``--base=3Dx/pmu``, where ``x`` is whatever name your repository = uses to +track the KVM x86 remote. + +Co-Posting Tests +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ +KVM selftests that are associated with KVM changes, e.g. regression tests = for +bug fixes, should be posted along with the KVM changes as a single series. + +KVM-unit-tests should *always* be posted separately. Tools, e.g. b4 am, d= on't +know that KVM-unit-tests is a separate repository and get confused when pa= tches +in a series apply on different trees. To tie KVM-unit-tests patches back = to +KVM patches, first post the KVM changes and then provide a lore Link: to t= he +KVM patch/series in the KVM-unit-tests patch(es). + +Notifications +------------- +When a patch/series is officially accepted, a notification email will be s= ent +in reply to the original posting (cover letter for multi-patch series). T= he +notification will include the tree and topic branch, along with the SHA1s = of +the commits of applied patches. + +If a subset of patches is applied, this will be clearly stated in the +notification. Unless stated otherwise, it's implied that any patches in t= he +series that were not accepted need more work and should be submitted in a = new +version. + +If for some reason a patch is dropped after officially being accepted, a r= eply +will be sent to the notification email explaining why the patch was droppe= d, as +well as the next steps. + +SHA1 Stability +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ +SHA1s are not 100% guaranteed to be stable until they land in Linus' tree!= A +SHA1 is *usually* stable once a notification has been sent, but things hap= pen. +In most cases, an update to the notification email be provided if an appli= ed +patch's SHA1 changes. However, in some scenarios, e.g. if all KVM x86 bra= nches +need to be rebased, individual notifications will not be given. + +Vulnerabilities +--------------- +Bugs that can be exploited by the guest to attack the host (kernel or +userspace), or that can be exploited by a nested VM to *its* host (L2 atta= cking +L1), are of particular interest to KVM. Please follow the protocol for +:ref:`securitybugs` if you suspect a bug can lead to an escape, data leak,= etc. + diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS index 6a47510d1592..13e67a8b4827 100644 --- a/MAINTAINERS +++ b/MAINTAINERS @@ -11436,6 +11436,7 @@ M: Sean Christopherson M: Paolo Bonzini L: kvm@vger.kernel.org S: Supported +P: Documentation/process/maintainer-kvm-x86.rst T: git git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/virt/kvm/kvm.git F: arch/x86/include/asm/kvm* F: arch/x86/include/asm/svm.h --=20 2.39.2.637.g21b0678d19-goog