[PATCH v2] Documentation/process: Add a maintainer entry profile for KVM/arm64

[PATCH v2] Documentation/process: Add a maintainer entry profile for KVM/arm64

[Matthias Goergens]

KVM/arm64 has no P: entry in MAINTAINERS, so nothing tells a contributor
that the kvmarm tree is used for integration only, or what the
maintainers expect patches to be based on.  Marc Zyngier said a profile
would help.

Add one covering the trees, the base for patches, the submit checklist,
key cycle dates and review cadence, and point the KVM/arm64 entry at it.

Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/875wzu4vuv.wl-maz@kernel.org/
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/87tsnb2dtq.wl-maz@kernel.org/
Signed-off-by: Matthias Goergens <matthias.goergens@gmail.com>
---
Changes since the RFC
(https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260925085621.562448-1-matthias.goergens@gmail.com/):

- Point at the MAINTAINERS entry instead of naming maintainers and lists.
- Describe master, topic branches and shared branches; drop the open
  questions, which the RFC's Sashiko review had also flagged.
- Base: prefer -rc1 to -rc3, not kvmarm/next; leave conflicts visible.
- Subject lines: capital letter after the prefixes.
- Architecture references: prefer rule identifiers; drop the comparison
  with KVM x86.
- Testing: selftests usually at the end of the series, reproducible
  performance measurements, tests encouraged rather than required for NV.
- Key cycle dates: no new features after -rc6; how fixes are sent.
- Review cadence: stability of commit IDs; answering bot reviews.
- Posted as a new thread, with the documentation maintainers and lists
  on Cc.

Steffen, Marc asked you for a short addition on KVM/arm64 on s390 for
the Trees section.  I've left it out and can add it as a follow-up.

Oliver, thanks for inviting an updated patch.  Corrections are welcome.

 .../process/maintainer-kvm-arm64.rst          | 181 ++++++++++++++++++
 MAINTAINERS                                   |   2 +
 2 files changed, 183 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 Documentation/process/maintainer-kvm-arm64.rst

diff --git a/Documentation/process/maintainer-kvm-arm64.rst b/Documentation/process/maintainer-kvm-arm64.rst
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..3b0bb56
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/process/maintainer-kvm-arm64.rst
@@ -0,0 +1,181 @@
+.. SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
+
+KVM/arm64
+=========
+
+This document describes how KVM/arm64 (``arch/arm64/kvm/`` and the other
+files listed under "KERNEL VIRTUAL MACHINE FOR ARM64 (KVM/arm64)" in
+MAINTAINERS) is maintained.  It supplements
+Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst.
+
+Overview
+--------
+
+The maintainers, reviewers and mailing lists for KVM/arm64 are listed in its
+MAINTAINERS entry.
+
+Trees
+~~~~~
+
+The KVM/arm64 tree is::
+
+  git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/kvmarm/kvmarm.git
+
+This tree is used for integration only: no development happens in it, and
+most patches should not be based on it (see `Base for patches`_).  Its
+branches are:
+
+``next``
+  Changes queued for the next merge window.  linux-next merges this branch.
+
+``fixes``
+  Fixes for the release currently in its -rc phase.  linux-next merges this
+  branch too.
+
+``master``
+  Follows the -rc tags in Linus Torvalds' tree.
+
+Changes leave the tree as signed tags, which are pulled into the main KVM tree
+(``git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/virt/kvm/kvm.git``) and from there reach Linus
+Torvalds.
+
+Topic branches are managed by the maintainers in their private trees, and only
+the result of integrating them is pushed out.  The exception is shared
+branches, which are published when necessary.  Where a series also touches
+code maintained elsewhere, most often the arm64 architecture code, the
+maintainers may set up a shared stable branch, based on an -rc tag, that both
+trees merge.  Say in the cover letter which parts of a series touch other
+subsystems.
+
+Base for patches
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+Base your patches on a tag published in Linus Torvalds' tree, preferably -rc1
+to -rc3.  If you rely on something merged later, for example a fix merged in
+-rc4, say why in the cover letter.  Patches based on linux-next are
+discouraged.
+
+Do not base patches on ``kvmarm/next`` either: it is rebuilt regularly, so a
+commit on it is generally the wrong base.  If your series conflicts with work
+queued there, leave the conflict for the maintainers to see, as it is a sign
+that something needs a closer look.  A proposed resolution is welcome.  The
+exception is a series that strictly continues one that has already been
+queued.
+
+If your series depends on something else that is not yet in mainline, such as
+another series under review, say so in the cover letter and name exactly what
+it applies on top of.
+
+Use ``git format-patch --base`` so that the base commit is recorded in the
+patches.
+
+Submit Checklist Addendum
+-------------------------
+
+Recipients and threading
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+Send the whole series to all of the maintainers and reviewers listed for
+KVM/arm64, not a selection of them.  Post each new version as a new thread,
+not as a reply to the previous version, with a cover letter for anything
+longer than a single patch.
+
+Subject lines
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+Changes to KVM/arm64 use the ``KVM: arm64:`` prefix, often followed by a
+sub-topic such as ``nv:`` or ``vgic:``.  Selftest changes use ``KVM: arm64:
+selftests:`` or ``KVM: selftests:``.
+``git log --oneline`` on the files you touch shows what is in use.  The text
+after the prefixes starts with a capital letter, for example ``KVM: arm64: nv:
+Fix life cycle of the nested_mmus array``.
+
+Architecture references
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+KVM/arm64 code tracks the Arm Architecture Reference Manual (the "Arm ARM",
+document DDI0487) closely.  Where a change depends on architected behaviour,
+explain why the change is needed and cite the Arm ARM in the commit message
+or in a comment.  Where the rule has an identifier, such as ``R_QXXPC``, quote
+that: identifiers stay the same across revisions of the document, while
+section numbers do not.  Otherwise give the revision along with the section,
+for example ``DDI0487L.a D24.2.70``.  The same applies to other architecture
+documents.
+
+Testing
+~~~~~~~
+
+Say in the cover letter how the series was tested: which tests, and on which
+hardware or model.  The KVM selftests (``tools/testing/selftests/kvm/``) and
+kvm-unit-tests are the usual test suites.  Put selftest changes in patches of
+their own, separate from the KVM changes and usually at the end of the series.
+
+KVM/arm64 can run in several modes, which are described under
+``kvm-arm.mode=`` in Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt.  Test
+the modes your change can affect.
+
+If a patch aims to improve performance, describe exactly how you measured it,
+in enough detail for others to reproduce the results.  Measurements made on a
+software model such as QEMU or the Arm FVP say nothing about performance on
+hardware.
+
+New tests are encouraged, particularly for nested virtualisation, where
+coverage is poor.  Depending on the change, selftests may not be enough; the
+maintainers may ask for testing with a VMM, for example.
+
+Userspace API
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+Document changes to the userspace API, usually in
+Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst or in the files under
+Documentation/virt/kvm/devices/ and Documentation/virt/kvm/arm/.
+
+Fixes
+~~~~~
+
+Add a ``Fixes:`` tag for bug fixes.  If the fix should go to stable kernels,
+add ``Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org``; the maintainers may add it when applying
+if the bug calls for it.
+
+Key Cycle Dates
+---------------
+
+Changes for the next merge window are queued on ``next``.  New features are
+usually not merged once -rc6 has been published; from then on, only fixes are
+queued.  This is not a hard rule, but posting a feature just before -rc6
+guarantees nothing.
+
+Fixes for the current release are queued on ``fixes`` and sent upstream at
+intervals that depend on how severe the bugs are.  There is no cut-off for
+fixes, but the maintainers may defer a low-priority fix to the next merge
+window.
+
+Review Cadence
+--------------
+
+Unless the maintainers ask for a new version sooner, allow at least a week
+between versions of a series, and only post a new version once there has
+been enough review to justify it.  Posting more often delays review rather
+than speeding it up.
+
+Pinging a series that has had no response is fine.
+
+Answer reviews from bots such as Sashiko as you would any other review, even
+if only to say that a finding is wrong.  Pre-existing problems that a bot
+points out, and that are unrelated to the series, need not be fixed in its
+initial posting.
+
+Applied patches are normally acknowledged in reply to the posting, naming the
+branch (``next`` or ``fixes``) and the commits.  The maintainers try not to
+change the commit IDs of applied patches, but the IDs of merge commits almost
+always change.
+
+Minor problems are often fixed up by the maintainers when applying; if they
+say "no need to resend", don't.
+
+Security issues
+---------------
+
+Bugs that let a guest attack its host, or a nested guest attack its guest
+hypervisor, should be reported as described in
+Documentation/process/security-bugs.rst.
diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
index 7a162e9..183bf34 100644
--- a/MAINTAINERS
+++ b/MAINTAINERS
@@ -14596,7 +14596,9 @@ R:	Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@huawei.com>
 L:	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org (moderated for non-subscribers)
 L:	kvmarm@lists.linux.dev
 S:	Maintained
+P:	Documentation/process/maintainer-kvm-arm64.rst
 T:	git git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/kvmarm/kvmarm.git
+F:	Documentation/process/maintainer-kvm-arm64.rst
 F:	Documentation/virt/kvm/arm/
 F:	Documentation/virt/kvm/devices/arm*
 F:	arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm*

base-commit: d89e1d186ec9271bf78e62771779e9fc03bf0fc3
-- 
2.56.0

Re: [PATCH v2] Documentation/process: Add a maintainer entry profile for KVM/arm64

[Zenghui Yu]

Hi Matthias,

On 2026/10/30 16:33, Matthias Goergens wrote:
> KVM/arm64 has no P: entry in MAINTAINERS, so nothing tells a contributor
> that the kvmarm tree is used for integration only, or what the
> maintainers expect patches to be based on.  Marc Zyngier said a profile
> would help.
> 
> Add one covering the trees, the base for patches, the submit checklist,
> key cycle dates and review cadence, and point the KVM/arm64 entry at it.
> 
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/875wzu4vuv.wl-maz@kernel.org/
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/87tsnb2dtq.wl-maz@kernel.org/
> Signed-off-by: Matthias Goergens <matthias.goergens@gmail.com>
> ---
> Changes since the RFC
> (https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260925085621.562448-1-matthias.goergens@gmail.com/):
> 
> - Point at the MAINTAINERS entry instead of naming maintainers and lists.
> - Describe master, topic branches and shared branches; drop the open
>   questions, which the RFC's Sashiko review had also flagged.
> - Base: prefer -rc1 to -rc3, not kvmarm/next; leave conflicts visible.
> - Subject lines: capital letter after the prefixes.
> - Architecture references: prefer rule identifiers; drop the comparison
>   with KVM x86.
> - Testing: selftests usually at the end of the series, reproducible
>   performance measurements, tests encouraged rather than required for NV.
> - Key cycle dates: no new features after -rc6; how fixes are sent.
> - Review cadence: stability of commit IDs; answering bot reviews.
> - Posted as a new thread, with the documentation maintainers and lists
>   on Cc.
> 
> Steffen, Marc asked you for a short addition on KVM/arm64 on s390 for
> the Trees section.  I've left it out and can add it as a follow-up.
> 
> Oliver, thanks for inviting an updated patch.  Corrections are welcome.
> 
>  .../process/maintainer-kvm-arm64.rst          | 181 ++++++++++++++++++
>  MAINTAINERS                                   |   2 +
>  2 files changed, 183 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 Documentation/process/maintainer-kvm-arm64.rst

This looks pretty good. Thanks a lot for your efforts!

Acked-by: Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@huawei.com>