Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 05/47] MAINTAINERS: add missing KVM entry

[Cornelia Huck]

On Fri, 28 Jul 2017 13:59:08 +0200
Paolo Bonzini <address@hidden> wrote:

> On 28/07/2017 13:56, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> > On Fri, 28 Jul 2017 13:51:14 +0200
> > Paolo Bonzini <address@hidden> wrote:
> >   
> >> On 28/07/2017 09:00, Thomas Huth wrote:  
> >>> On 28.07.2017 07:35, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:    
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <address@hidden>
> >>>> ---
> >>>>  MAINTAINERS | 1 +
> >>>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> >>>>
> >>>> diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
> >>>> index 3b472d7a09..ece02522be 100644
> >>>> --- a/MAINTAINERS
> >>>> +++ b/MAINTAINERS
> >>>> @@ -278,6 +278,7 @@ S: Supported
> >>>>  F: */kvm.*
> >>>>  F: accel/kvm/
> >>>>  F: include/sysemu/kvm*.h
> >>>> +F: linux-headers/asm-*/kvm*.h    
> >>>
> >>> The linux-headers are not really maintained by the QEMU project - so I
> >>> guess we do not need an entry for these?    
> >>
> >> Actually I agree with the patch.  I'd like to be CCed on
> >> update-linux-headers patches, and this achieves it. :)  
> > 
> > But would it not a better idea to add an entry for all headers touched
> > by update-linux-headers, then?  
> 
> One thing doesn't exclude the other.  That entry would also list the
> script itself and linux-headers.  KVM, VFIO and virtio patterns can only
> list the files they care about.  Migration could list userfaultfd,
> possibly.  And there's also include/standard-headers/, which includes
> PCI and input subsystem files...  It has to be perfected, but it's a
> good idea.

Personally, I'm not really a fan. If something is changed in one of the
headers, it implies that either it has already been changed in the
original headers in Linux (and I will have seen it then), or that
someone is sending a preliminary patch (and I should hope that I'm
already cc:ed for the changes that this headers change is for then). It
does not really hurt, but it feels wrong.