linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 00/13] KVM: xen: update shared_info and vcpu

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 19 Sep 2023 09:48:28 +0100
From:   Paul Durrant <xadimgnik@...il.com>
To:     Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
        David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
Cc:     kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Paul Durrant <pdurrant@...zon.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 00/13] KVM: xen: update shared_info and vcpu_info
 handling

On 18/09/2023 18:12, Sean Christopherson wrote:
[snip]
> 
> Tag them RFC, explain your expectations, goals, and intent in the cover letter,
> don't copy+paste cover letters verbatim between versions, and summarize the RFC(s)
> when you get to a point where you're ready for others to jump in.  The cover
> letter is *identical* from v1=>v2=>v3, how is anyone supposed to understand what
> on earth is going on unless they happened to be in the same room as ya'll on
> Friday?

The cover letter is indeed identical because the purpose of the series 
has not changed. Each individual patch has a commit comment summarizing 
what changed from version to version or whether it is new in a 
perticular version. I thought this would be enough for any reviewer to 
be able to see what is going on. In future I will also roll these up 
into the cover letter.

> 
> Doing rapid-fire, early review on beta-quality patches is totally fine, so long
> as it's clear that others can effectively ignore the early versions unless they
> are deeply interested or whatever.
> 
> A disclaimer at the top of the cover letter, e.g.
> 
>    This series is a first attempt at an idea David had to improve performance
>    of the pfncache when KVM is emulating Xen.  David and I are still working out
>    the details, it's probably not necessary for other folks to review this right
>    now.
> 
> along with a summary of previous version and a transition from RFC => non-RFC
> makes it clear when I and others are expected to get involved.
> 
> In other words, use tags and the cover letter to communicate, don't just view the
> cover letter as a necessary evil to get people to care about your patches.

That was not the intention at all; I put all the detailed explanation in 
the commit comments because I thought that would make review *easier*.

   Paul