On 08.04.2022 13:37, Luca Fancellu wrote: > > >> On 8 Apr 2022, at 10:01, Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com> wrote: >> >> On 08.04.2022 10:45, Luca Fancellu wrote: >>> --- >>> docs/misc/arm/device-tree/cpupools.txt | 140 +++++++++++++++++ >>> xen/arch/arm/include/asm/smp.h | 3 + >>> xen/common/Kconfig | 7 + >>> xen/common/Makefile | 1 + >>> xen/common/boot_cpupools.c | 207 +++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>> xen/common/sched/cpupool.c | 12 +- >>> xen/include/xen/sched.h | 14 ++ >>> 7 files changed, 383 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> create mode 100644 docs/misc/arm/device-tree/cpupools.txt >>> create mode 100644 xen/common/boot_cpupools.c >> >> Under whose maintainership is the new file to fall? Without an >> addition to ./MAINTAINERS and without the file being placed in >> xen/common/sched/, it'll be REST maintainers, which I think would >> better be avoided. Would it perhaps make sense to have this as >> xen/common/sched/boot.c, allowing other boot-only code to >> potentially be moved there over time? This would then also avoid >> me asking about the underscore in the file name: Underscores are >> a somewhat artificial thing for use in places where dashes can't >> be used. Yet in the file system dashes are fine, and dashes are >> (slightly) easier to type. >> > > Ok I can put the new file under xen/common/sched/ as boot.c, should this new > file be under this section? > > CPU POOLS > M: Juergen Gross <jgr...@suse.com> > M: Dario Faggioli <dfaggi...@suse.com> > S: Supported > F: xen/common/sched/cpupool.c > + F: xen/common/sched/boot.c
If it's to hold general scheduler code (which this shorter name would suggest), it shouldn't need any change to ./MAINTAINERS as the scheduler section would already cover it then. If it was to remain CPU-pools-specific, then you'd need to stick to the longer name and put it in the section you have reproduced above. Jan
