I make no claims that this is accurate or exhaustive but I think it's a
reasonable place to start.
As the file mentions, the purpose of this file is to give contributors
information about who they can go to with questions about a particular piece of
code or who they can ask for review.
If you sign up for a piece of code and indicate that it's Maintained or
Supported, please be prepared to be responsive to questions about that
subsystem.
Signed-off-by: Anthony Liguori <aliguori@us.ibm.com>
---
v1 -> v2
- Sort alphabetically
- Copy in instructions from linux MAINTAINERS
- Fix entries based on review feedback
Since nobody else seems interested in maintaining PPC, let's change the
maintainer to myself. I keep a staging tree anyways and am probably the
person touching most of that code these days.
This changes the maintainer entry for working ppc targets to myself.
Signed-off-by: Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>
This patch adds information about who handles what when it comes to S390.
I'll gladly support anything that's related to the device emulation model and
S390 KVM parts.
Since this patchset doesn't implement S390 CPU emulation, I left that part
with a question mark. As soon as Uli's patchset gets committed I'd recommend
setting him there.
Signed-off-by: Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>
Signed-off-by: Aurelien Jarno <aurelien@aurel32.net>
kqemu introduces a number of restrictions on the i386 target. The worst is that
it prevents large memory from working in the default build.
Furthermore, kqemu is fundamentally flawed in a number of ways. It relies on
the TSC as a time source which will not be reliable on a multiple processor
system in userspace. Since most modern processors are multicore, this severely
limits the utility of kqemu.
kvm is a viable alternative for people looking to accelerate qemu and has the
benefit of being supported by the upstream Linux kernel. If someone can
implement work arounds to remove the restrictions introduced by kqemu, I'm
happy to avoid and/or revert this patch.
N.B. kqemu will still function in the 0.11 series but this patch removes it from
the 0.12 series.
Paul, please Ack or Nack this patch.
Signed-off-by: Anthony Liguori <aliguori@us.ibm.com>
Gerd Hoffmann