Re: [PATCH 1/3] KVM: X86: Add "nopvspin" parameter to disable PV spinlocks

[Zhenzhong Duan]

On 2019/10/1 16:39, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
> Zhenzhong Duan<zhenzhong.duan@xxxxxxxxxx>  writes:
>
> > On 2019/9/30 23:41, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
> > > Zhenzhong Duan<zhenzhong.duan@xxxxxxxxxx>   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