Re: [PATCH v2] MAINTAINERS: consolidate vm-event/monitor entry

[Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

On 06.09.2023 14:40, Anthony PERARD wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 31, 2023 at 08:15:13AM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> If the F: description is to be trusted, the two xen/arch/x86/hvm/
>> lines were fully redundant with the earlier wildcard ones. Arch header
>> files, otoh, were no longer covered by anything as of the move from
>> include/asm-*/ to arch/*/include/asm/. Further also generalize (by
>> folding) the x86- and Arm-specific mem_access.c entries.
>>
>> Finally, again assuming the F: description can be trusted, there's no
>> point listing arch/, common/, and include/ entries separately. Fold
>> them all.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> -F:  xen/arch/*/monitor.c
>> -F:  xen/arch/*/vm_event.c
>> -F:  xen/arch/arm/mem_access.c
>> -F:  xen/arch/x86/include/asm/hvm/monitor.h
>> -F:  xen/arch/x86/include/asm/hvm/vm_event.h
>> -F:  xen/arch/x86/mm/mem_access.c
>> -F:  xen/arch/x86/hvm/monitor.c
>> -F:  xen/arch/x86/hvm/vm_event.c
>> -F:  xen/common/mem_access.c
>> -F:  xen/common/monitor.c
>> -F:  xen/common/vm_event.c
>> -F:  xen/include/*/mem_access.h
>> -F:  xen/include/*/monitor.h
>> -F:  xen/include/*/vm_event.h
>> +F:  xen/*/mem_access.[ch]
>> +F:  xen/*/monitor.[ch]
>> +F:  xen/*/vm_event.[ch]
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Did you mean to for example change the maintainer ship of
> "xen/arch/x86/mm/mem_access.c"? Before it was:
>     - VM EVENT, MEM ACCESS and MONITOR
>     - X86 MEMORY MANAGEMENT
>     - X86 ARCHITECTURE
> And now, it's just:
>     - X86 MEMORY MANAGEMENT
>     - X86 ARCHITECTURE
> 
> (see ./scripts/get_maintainer.pl --sections -f xen/arch/x86/mm/mem_access.c)
> 
> Also, now "xen/include/xen/monitor.h" is only "THE REST".

No, no change of maintainership was intended. But there was an uncertainty,
which is why I said "assuming the F: description can be trusted". So ...

> On the other hand, there's no change for "xen/common/monitor.c", so the
> pattern works for this particular file.

... together with this observation, I take it that

           F:   */net/*         all files in "any top level directory"/net

is actually at best misleading / ambiguous - I read it as not just a single
level of directories, but it may well be that that's what is meant. At
which point the question is how "any number of directories" could be
expressed. Would **/ or .../**/... work here? I'm afraid my Perl is far
from sufficient to actually spot where (and hence how) this is handled in
the script.

Jan