[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y/aIP4aCxTVOU/ZC@google.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2023 13:25:19 -0800
From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
To: "Maciej S. Szmigiero" <mail@...iej.szmigiero.name>
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
Sagi Shahar <sagis@...gle.com>,
Erdem Aktas <erdemaktas@...gle.com>,
Peter Shier <pshier@...gle.com>,
Anish Ghulati <aghulati@...gle.com>,
Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@...ux.dev>,
James Houghton <jthoughton@...gle.com>,
Anish Moorthy <amoorthy@...gle.com>,
Ben Gardon <bgardon@...gle.com>,
David Matlack <dmatlack@...gle.com>,
Ricardo Koller <ricarkol@...gle.com>,
Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@...gle.com>,
Aaron Lewis <aaronlewis@...gle.com>,
Ashish Kalra <ashish.kalra@....com>,
Babu Moger <babu.moger@....com>, Chao Gao <chao.gao@...el.com>,
Chao Peng <chao.p.peng@...ux.intel.com>,
Chenyi Qiang <chenyi.qiang@...el.com>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw@...zon.co.uk>,
Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito <eesposit@...hat.com>,
Gavin Shan <gshan@...hat.com>,
Guang Zeng <guang.zeng@...el.com>,
Hou Wenlong <houwenlong.hwl@...group.com>,
Jiaxi Chen <jiaxi.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
Jing Liu <jing2.liu@...el.com>,
Junaid Shahid <junaids@...gle.com>,
Kai Huang <kai.huang@...el.com>,
Leonardo Bras <leobras@...hat.com>,
Like Xu <like.xu.linux@...il.com>,
Li RongQing <lirongqing@...du.com>,
Maxim Levitsky <mlevitsk@...hat.com>,
Michael Roth <michael.roth@....com>,
Michal Luczaj <mhal@...x.co>,
Mingwei Zhang <mizhang@...gle.com>,
Nikunj A Dadhania <nikunj@....com>,
Paul Durrant <pdurrant@...zon.com>,
Peng Hao <flyingpenghao@...il.com>,
Peter Gonda <pgonda@...gle.com>, Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>,
Robert Hoo <robert.hu@...ux.intel.com>,
Suravee Suthikulpanit <suravee.suthikulpanit@....com>,
Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>,
Vipin Sharma <vipinsh@...gle.com>,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
Wei Wang <wei.w.wang@...el.com>,
Xiaoyao Li <xiaoyao.li@...el.com>,
Yu Zhang <yu.c.zhang@...ux.intel.com>,
Zhenzhong Duan <zhenzhong.duan@...el.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Documentation/process: Add a maintainer handbook for
KVM x86
On Wed, Feb 22, 2023, Maciej S. Szmigiero wrote:
> On 17.02.2023 23:54, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > +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 Programmer’s
> > +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, especially
> > +not in comments. Instead, copy-paste the relevant snippet (if warranted), and
> > +reference sections/tables/figures by name.
>
> This says do "copy-paste the relevant snippet"...
>
> > 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.
>
> ...but this seems to say "don't do that".
Yeah, that didn't come out right.
> More specific guidance would probably help here.
Is this better?
Do not reference specific sections, tables, figures, etc. by number, especially
not in comments. Instead, if necessary (see below), copy-paste the relevant
snippet 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.
Generally speaking, do not explicitly reference or copy-paste from the SDM or
APM in comments. With few exceptions, KVM *must* honor architectural behavior,
therefore it's implied that KVM behavior is emulating SDM and/or APM behavior.
Note, referencing the SDM/APM in changelogs to justify the change and provide
context is perfectly ok and encouraged.
> > +If a patch touches multiple topics, traverse up the conceptual tree to find 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 prefix.
>
> Do we strictly obey the "75 characters max" rule for the subject/shortlog
> or do we prefer to be more flexible here if it results in a more
> descriptive patch subject?
I prefer to be a little flexible, I'll expand this section to clarify that.
> (...)
> > +Testing
> > +-------
> > +At a bare minimum, *all* patches in a series must build cleanly for KVM_INTEL=m
> > +KVM_AMD=m, and KVM_WERROR=y. Building every possible combination of Kconfigs
> > +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 the
> > +obvious, the tests need to pass).
>
> I would add an exception here from mandatory testing for changes that
> obviously have negligible probability of affecting runtime behavior.
>
> For example: patches that modify just code comments or documentation.
Agreed, will add.
Regarding documentation, I think I'll also add a requirement of 'make htmldocs'
without warnings for non-trivial docs changes. It's all too easy to write buggy
ReST "code" that looks correct as raw text, e.g. the whole double-colon thing.
> > 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, running
> > +with TDP disabled is strongly encouraged. For all other changes, if the code
> > +being modified depends on and/or interacts with a module param, testing with
> > +the relevant settings is mandatory.
> > +
> > +Note, KVM selftests and KVM-unit-tests do have known failures. If you suspect
> > +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 state
> > +what level of testing you were able to do, e.g. in the cover letter.
> > +
> (...)
>
> Thanks for preparing such a detailed handbook Sean.
>
> However, having so many rules might seem intimidating for newcomers, and
> deter them from contributing out of fear that they'll be screamed at for
> accidentally breaking some obscure rule.
>
> That's especially true for unpaid volunteers that might become
> professional kernel developers one day if their learning curve isn't
> made too steep.
>
> Maybe have a paragraph or two that, despite all these rules, KVM x86
> strives to be a welcome community, encouraging newcomers and understanding
> their beginner mistakes (or so)?
I like that idea a lot, I'll add a section at the very top.
Thanks much!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists