On 2024/7/29 上午11:03, WangYuli wrote:
Hi Bibo and Huacai, Ah... tell me you two aren't arguing, right? Both of you are working towards the same goal—making the upstream code for the Loongarch architecture as clean and elegant as possible. If it's just a disagreement about how to handle this small patch, there's no need to make things complicated. As a partner of yours and a community developer passionate about Loongson CPU, I'd much rather see you two working together harmoniously than complaining about each other's work. I have full confidence in Bibo's judgment on the direction of KVM for Loongarch, and I also believe that Huacai, as the Loongarch maintainer, has always been fulfilling his responsibilities. You are both excellent Linux developers. That's all. To be specific about the controversy caused by this particular commit, I think the root cause is that the KVM documentation for Loongarch hasn't been upstreamed. In my opinion, the documentation seems ready to be upstreamed. If you're all busy with more important work, I can take the time to submit them and provide a Chinese translation. If this is feasible, it would be better to merge this commit after that.
Yuli, The argument is normal in the work and life :) You are right, KVM document is important and any contribution is welcome. Regards Bibo Mao
Best wishes, -- WangYuli
