Messages in this thread | | | From | "Maciej S. Szmigiero" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v5 00/13] KVM: Scalable memslots implementation | Date | Wed, 20 Oct 2021 20:40:06 +0200 |
| |
On 20.10.2021 00:07, Sean Christopherson wrote: > On Mon, Sep 20, 2021, Maciej S. Szmigiero wrote: > > For future revisions, feel free to omit the lengthy intro and just provide links > to previous versions.
Will do.
>> On x86-64 the code was well tested, passed KVM unit tests and KVM >> selftests with KASAN on. >> And, of course, booted various guests successfully (including nested >> ones with TDP MMU enabled). >> On other KVM platforms the code was compile-tested only. >> >> Changes since v1: > > ... > >> Changes since v2: > > ... > >> Changes since v3: > > ... > >> Changes since v4: >> * Rebase onto v5.15-rc2 (torvalds/master), >> >> * Fix 64-bit division of n_memslots_pages for 32-bit KVM, >> >> * Collect Claudio's Reviewed-by tags for some of the patches. > > Heh, this threw me for a loop. The standard pattern is to start with the most > recent version and work backwards, that way reviewers can quickly see the delta > for _this_ version. I.e. > > Changes since v4: > ... > > Changes since v3: > ... >
I have always used the chronological order but your argument about reviewers being able to quickly see the delta makes sense - will switch to having the latest changes on the top in the next version.
By the way, looking at the current https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/ at the time I am writing this, while most of v3+ submissions are indeed using the "latest on the top" order, some aren't: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210813145302.3933-1-kevin3.tang@gmail.com/T/ https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20211015024658.1353987-1-xianting.tian@linux.alibaba.com/T/ https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/YW%2Fq70dLyF+YudyF@T590/T/ (this one uses a hybrid approach - current version changes on the top, remaining changeset in chronological order).
Thanks, Maciej
| |