From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=159.226.251.25 ARC-Seal: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; t=1794077345; b=md2bauQvoe3mey+UuntWpw5/JXahABc6xPpyWwoJVmvb4bF2Lc2nqGIm72gg0T0h7sqH FoA92hgSZYP6mnlRgxGuOMk6JZgnQ25Af4wvBMLy7M4+KHGM6txyrlHVC4imtNq6eMotS b/GFdapSZqMUZyz97G0FvT+oFsHc/Qm7E+V2Y8vBZcJw86H0nvqsXFKX2KdfKEFBOUItT I0IQC/uXDcmyDRqY3d6VhGCE9dEvVRyTs1hrv4+fgvvm6HQTGTULnS+fwzHSMnnVOF+GZ dTnEscXej4urb9UvgZERMehP/oTV1w29f64/UKDsq+avgigh5nnMWuFzFywRit+8DfQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1794077345; h=DMARC-Filter:Received:From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:In-Reply-To: References:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding: X-CM-TRANSID:X-Coremail-Antispam:X-Originating-IP:X-CM-SenderInfo; bh=yyG4T15dTa4Dx/8Fj4WWDBAED1OEdpssCH+wLfgoBEA=; b=Vt4jY8YcDZOjr1gtjY42akiET24Qx/LQOZ0tIv2GYU1CibjWODO/Kchf61d2XJ0+mVd7 DQRnJg+ER3HF7xXju/GYflAQENPvNI3B2v7UEYXrZlKvLd4JoNueIrfvqFJZMfVRbkPAf L4J1VlXCuqWamxDfFTmZ6PShD0obPHqVvDH6GG2E12rYD9Gpr9RY3bDhFVFyVF/ZDQgbb bvmSLaLA7fVjoh7N6Q2TSshhjkv/5eEwGIW33KxMY1v1bPgCCnRwi4NrEWVY9Y9rjI766 7m0YdNkOywBqNqtkVk/nRi7WLi9INtDuUZRICUhz54y1MUtQPglDWMBY6SmtmdLYiIA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none header.from=iscas.ac.cn; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=iscas.ac.cn; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=159.226.251.25 Received: from cstnet.cn (smtp25.cstnet.cn [159.226.251.25]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (prime256v1) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 71E15606A326 for ; Sat, 7 Nov 2026 18:49:03 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 smtp.subspace.kernel.org 71E15606A326 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=iscas.ac.cn Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=iscas.ac.cn Received: from [172.100.0.8] (unknown [36.110.52.2]) by APP-05 (Coremail) with SMTP id zQCowAC3T7WWcu9qyHeKAA--.6613S2; Sun, 08 Nov 2026 02:48:54 +0800 (CST) From: Wentao Liang To: Joonas Lahtinen Cc: Jani Nikula , Rodrigo Vivi , Tvrtko Ursulin , David Airlie , Simona Vetter , intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/i915: Fix vm reference leak in mock_gem_device() Date: Sat, 07 Nov 2026 17:09:52 +0000 Message-ID: <1794071392.2684479.vulab@iscas.ac.cn> In-Reply-To: <178962823827.28653.5098493516220452854@jlahtine-mobl> References: <20260916171935.2087305-1-vulab@iscas.ac.cn> <178962823827.28653.5098493516220452854@jlahtine-mobl> X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: List-Owner: Precedence: list MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-CM-TRANSID:zQCowAC3T7WWcu9qyHeKAA--.6613S2 X-Coremail-Antispam: 1UD129KBjvJXoWxWFWUXr48uFWftryfury5XFb_yoW5ur1UpF s3K3W3Ar1kGF1fCws2vF40y34ruFZ5A3yUXFs8W3yUZ3Z8uFyIgFWSyF4jvasru393Wr12 vr4j9rykZF4DAaDanT9S1TB71UUUUU7qnTZGkaVYY2UrUUUUjbIjqfuFe4nvWSU5nxnvy2 9KBjDU0xBIdaVrnRJUUUvIb7Iv0xC_Kw4lb4IE77IF4wAFc2x0x2IEx4CE42xK8VAvwI8I cIk0rVWrJVCq3wAFIxvE14AKwVWUJVWUGwA2ocxC64kIII0Yj41l84x0c7CEw4AK67xGY2 AK021l84ACjcxK6xIIjxv20xvE14v26r4j6ryUM28EF7xvwVC0I7IYx2IY6xkF7I0E14v2 6r4j6F4UM28EF7xvwVC2z280aVAFwI0_Gr1j6F4UJwA2z4x0Y4vEx4A2jsIEc7CjxVAFwI 0_Gr1j6F4UJwAS0I0E0xvYzxvE52x082IY62kv0487Mc02F40EFcxC0VAKzVAqx4xG6I80 ewAv7VC0I7IYx2IY67AKxVWUtVWrXwAv7VC2z280aVAFwI0_Cr0_Gr1UMcvjeVCFs4IE7x kEbVWUJVW8JwACjcxG0xvEwIxGrwCY1x0262kKe7AKxVWUtVW8ZwCF04k20xvY0x0EwIxG rwCF04k20xvE74AGY7Cv6cx26r48ZrWUJr1UMxC20s026xCaFVCjc4AY6r1j6r4UMI8I3I 0E5I8CrVAFwI0_Jr0_Jr4lx2IqxVCjr7xvwVAFwI0_JrI_JrWlx4CE17CEb7AF67AKxVWU tVW8ZwCIc40Y0x0EwIxGrwCI42IY6xIIjxv20xvE14v26r1j6r1xMIIF0xvE2Ix0cI8IcV CY1x0267AKxVW8JVWxJwCI42IY6xAIw20EY4v20xvaj40_Jr0_JF4lIxAIcVC2z280aVAF wI0_Gr0_Cr1lIxAIcVC2z280aVCY1x0267AKxVW8Jr0_Cr1UYxBIdaVFxhVjvjDU0xZFpf 9x07b0DGrUUUUU= X-CM-SenderInfo: pyxotu46lvutnvoduhdfq/1tbiCRIEA2rvPctHVAAAs8 Hi Joonas, First of all, I sincerely apologize for my very late reply, and thank you for taking the time to raise these concerns. I have read your message carefully. Your criticism is justified, not only regarding this particular patch, but also regarding the way I have been submitting patches to the kernel community. For this patch, I failed to properly assess the severity and scope of the issue before submitting it. This is a selftest-only cleanup, and it should never have been marked for stable backporting. I also failed to pay sufficient attention to the subsystem's coding conventions and teardown ordering. These are things I should have checked myself before asking maintainers to review the change. I have revisited the relevant code and revised the patch to address these issues. The v2 removes the Fixes and stable tags, corrects the subject prefix, and adjusts the cleanup ordering. I understand that correcting these details now does not excuse the lack of care in the original submission. I also want to be transparent about the use of AI tools. The initial finding came from static analysis, and I used DeepSeek and GPT 6.1 Sol to help examine the finding and prepare the patch. However, I was the one who decided to submit it, and I am fully responsible for its correctness, testing, and presentation. Using these tools does not reduce that responsibility, and I should not have submitted a patch without sufficient independent verification. More importantly, I owe you and the other maintainers an apology for my broader submission practices. I submitted far too many patches in a short period of time without giving each one the attention it deserved. I also failed to respond to review comments and requests for changes, including requests to acknowledge AI assistance. I understand how frustrating this must have been, especially when maintainers are spending their own limited time reviewing contributions. You were right to question whether I was taking the review process seriously. Looking back at how I handled those submissions, I can understand why they gave that impression. I regret that my actions wasted maintainers' time and undermined their trust in my contributions. I am changing how I approach kernel contributions. I will stop submitting patches in bulk, review outstanding feedback individually, and prioritize resolving existing discussions over sending new patches. Going forward, I will submit changes only after I have examined the relevant code paths, checked the subsystem conventions, and performed appropriate validation. I will also make sure that any AI assistance is properly acknowledged. I understand that trust cannot be restored simply by writing an apology. It will take consistent care and follow-through in future contributions, and I intend to demonstrate that through my actions. I have prepared a revised version of this patch, but I also understand if you do not consider this particular cleanup worth pursuing. I will respect that decision and will not continue pushing it if you would prefer to leave it aside. Thank you again for your feedback, and I am genuinely sorry for the unnecessary review burden and for not responding sooner. Regards, Wentao