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

[Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

On 06.09.2023 16:45, Anthony PERARD wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 06, 2023 at 02:50:22PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> 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
> 
> I guess the ambiguity would lie in the word "files". Here, "files" is a
> single file and not a directory, unlike the shell globing which would
> include directories with a '*'.
> 
> The first '*' is described at "any top level directory", but it is also
> "only top level directory". This kind of tells me that there is only a
> single level of directories that is match by '*'.
> 
>> 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.
> 
> I think you could write a regexp with the "N:" type instead of "F:".
> This is described Linux's MAINTAINERS file, but not ours, yet our
> get_maintainer.pl script has the functionality. It might be nice to be
> able to write just '**' but until someone implement that, we could go
> for a regex, which is more complicated and more prone to mistake.
> 
> So I think in the short-term, you want:
> 
> N:    ^xen/.*/mem_access\.[ch]$
> N:    ^xen/.*/monitor\.[ch]$
> N:    ^xen/.*/vm_event\.[ch]$

Except that as per Linux'es description F: and N: differ beyond how
file names are expressed / matched. I don't think I want to be the
one to introduce something which I've been complaining about on the
Linux side (people being Cc-ed just because at some point they ended
up touching a file).

I conclude that for the time being I ought to revert that change of
mine.

Jan

> As for adding "**", there's maybe something to do with
> "file_match_pattern()" in get_maintainer.pl, this function compare the
> number of '/' in both the pattern and the filepath to find out if a '*'
> only match one level of directory or more.
> 
> Cheers,
>