Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] KVM: X86: Add "nopvspin" parameter to disable PV
 spinlocks
To:     Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc:     Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
        Radim Krcmar <rkrcmar@redhat.com>,
        Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>,
        Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
        Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
References: <1569759666-26904-1-git-send-email-zhenzhong.duan@oracle.com>
 <1569759666-26904-2-git-send-email-zhenzhong.duan@oracle.com>
 <87pnjh3i6i.fsf@vitty.brq.redhat.com>
 <aae59646-be5f-6455-a033-ed29861107ce@oracle.com>
 <87eezw3lna.fsf@vitty.brq.redhat.com>
From:   Zhenzhong Duan <zhenzhong.duan@oracle.com>
Organization: Oracle Corporation
Message-ID: <fdd14f28-74e9-5cf9-2f5a-09c884c55110@oracle.com>
Date:   Tue, 1 Oct 2019 17:47:00 +0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/60.9.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <87eezw3lna.fsf@vitty.brq.redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-US
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk


On 2019/10/1 16:39, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
> Zhenzhong Duan<zhenzhong.duan@oracle.com>  writes:
>
>> On 2019/9/30 23:41, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
>>> Zhenzhong Duan<zhenzhong.duan@oracle.com>   writes:
>>>
>>>> There are cases where a guest tries to switch spinlocks to bare metal
>>>> behavior (e.g. by setting "xen_nopvspin" on XEN platform and
>>>> "hv_nopvspin" on HYPER_V).
>>>>
>>>> That feature is missed on KVM, add a new parameter "nopvspin" to disable
>>>> PV spinlocks for KVM guest.
>>>>
>>>> This new parameter is also intended to replace "xen_nopvspin" and
>>>> "hv_nopvspin" in the future.
>>> Any reason to not do it right now? We will probably need to have compat
>>> code to support xen_nopvspin/hv_nopvspin too but emit a 'is deprecated'
>>> warning.
>> Sorry the description isn't clear, I'll fix it.
>>
>> I did the compat work in the other two patches.
>> [PATCH 2/3] xen: Mark "xen_nopvspin" parameter obsolete and map it to "nopvspin"
>> [PATCH 3/3] x86/hyperv: Mark "hv_nopvspin" parameter obsolete and map it to "nopvspin"
>>
> For some reason I got CCed only on the first one and moreover,

The three patches have different maintainers/reviewers by get_maintainer.pl, I added
"Cc: maintainers/reviewers" to each patch then git-sendemail picked them automaticly.
I meaned to not disturb maintainers with the field they aren't in charge of. It looks
I'm wrong.

So what's the correct way dealing with this? Should I send the whole patchset to all
the maintainers/reviewers related to all the patches?

> I don't see e.g PATCH3 on 'linux-hyperv' mailing list.

Thanks for point out, I'll add it.

Zhenzhong