From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 410B831D381 for ; Mon, 23 Mar 2026 21:36:05 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1774301766; cv=none; b=kA/2SQ/Hz8cPQM6NsWyrI1Agb3587tGCn0fDhfsUWowwymh+4+w2YsR+D1PH0c0eZPmQ2PjVVaYQ5Vd9v0LF8Ge7ROsclU3pxjvg8neSivqj0ZpdV31pSUoDHO7i1Y/I3G1MxWgks36Vz568E4rmuAD/8saJUITG0yBXgmsBSn8= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1774301766; c=relaxed/simple; bh=/Gb305a+Cn7PNqgbnF81KjVBMXAtfU7WzFxbKVQ11/E=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-Id:In-Reply-To:References: Mime-Version:Content-Type; b=feS+EoPVzkzdqi9RuvGDcDd8mOncrcBsksL64s5leoQjai7uQeHeInbR0jE7+WHMUox3VCf3L6oHlPVFAX6VQNjnksl8I3a9sG7/85f3IEw6/Wby1gExbtpoh9+4ZEAmKNvFhXo6jTDheALLrlq0TnzHptVW+Yy1xW3ZtiJ2aw0= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux-foundation.org header.i=@linux-foundation.org header.b=gNxb4JLn; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux-foundation.org header.i=@linux-foundation.org header.b="gNxb4JLn" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4F5B6C4CEF7; Mon, 23 Mar 2026 21:36:05 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=linux-foundation.org; s=korg; t=1774301765; bh=/Gb305a+Cn7PNqgbnF81KjVBMXAtfU7WzFxbKVQ11/E=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=gNxb4JLn80isFDbfugd94d0nRtAWVEmNAFitcwGRB+lvNChb2j1ogOowP5WcNvkCo 8C8o+yY44JdIVm8Sptsmd9nkCBb1DnugY1xNEt4EeQeu7KghVN62EHISTftzTpWx4n P+/JATelXIv+1Grehx9vPb8Uw+UBSNLTXVh9zlWw= Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2026 14:36:04 -0700 From: Andrew Morton To: Pedro Falcato Cc: "Lorenzo Stoakes (Oracle)" , Roman Gushchin , David Hildenbrand , Zi Yan , Baolin Wang , "Liam R . Howlett" , Nico Pache , Ryan Roberts , Dev Jain , Barry Song , Lance Yang , Vlastimil Babka , Mike Rapoport , Suren Baghdasaryan , Michal Hocko , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/9] mm/huge_memory: refactor zap_huge_pmd() Message-Id: <20260323143604.603b20aec4e3ab77cabec107@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: References: <20260319200917.ce345a369d035050b6329ac5@linux-foundation.org> <87tsu9kgv3.fsf@linux.dev> <20260320203311.715ed75bcd84c18d24894324@linux-foundation.org> <20260321171530.8b3e8207f89d5a7384b9f01f@linux-foundation.org> <5cd57c69-7193-422f-b6b5-75bb5234e5f3@lucifer.local> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.8.0beta1 (GTK+ 2.24.33; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Mon, 23 Mar 2026 12:34:31 +0000 Pedro Falcato wrote: > On Mon, Mar 23, 2026 at 11:31:29AM +0000, Lorenzo Stoakes (Oracle) wrote: > > On Sat, Mar 21, 2026 at 05:15:30PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > On Fri, 20 Mar 2026 20:33:11 -0700 Andrew Morton wrote: > > > > > > > A lot of patchsets are "failed to apply". What is Sashiko trying to > > > > apply MM patches to? It would take some smarts to apply the v2 > > > > patchset when v1 is presently in mm.git? > > > > > > ? > > > > > > The way things are going at present, I'm just not going to apply a > > > > 50% noise vs. signal?... maybe wait until we're in the 9x'%s? > > > > > series which Sashiko "failed to apply". And that's cool, I'll just > > > wait for a version which Sashiko was able to apply. And then not > > > apply unless all Sashiko questions are resolved or convincingly refuted. > > > > Andrew, for crying out loud. Please don't do this. > > > > 2 of the 3 series I respan on Friday, working a 13 hour day to do so, don't > > apply to Sashiko, but do apply to the mm tree. > > > > I haven't the _faintest clue_ how we are supposed to factor a 3rd party > > experimental website applying or not applying series into our work?? > > > > And 'not apply unless all Sashiko questions are resolved or convincingly > > refuted.' is seriously concerning. > > FWIW I wholeheartedly agree. I don't understand how we don't require proper > M: or R: reviews on patches before merging I wish people would stop making this claim, without substantiation. I've looked (deeply) at the data, which is equally available to us all. Has anyone else? After weeding out a few special cases (especially DAMON) (this time also maple_tree), the amount of such unreviewed material which enters mm-stable and mainline is very very low. > Like, sure, sashiko can be useful, and is better than nothing. But unless > sashiko is better than the maintainers, it should be kept as optional. Rule #1 is, surely, "don't add bugs". This thing finds bugs. If its hit rate is 50% then that's plenty high enough to justify people spending time to go through and check its output. > Seriously, I can't wrap my head around the difference in treatment in > "human maintainers, experts in the code, aren't required to review a patch" Speaking of insulting. > vs "make the fscking AI happy or it's not going anywhere". It's almost > insulting. Look, I know people are busy. If checking these reports slows us down and we end up merging less code and less buggy code then that's a good tradeoff. Also, gimme a break. Like everyone else I'm still trying to wrap my head how best to incorporate this new tool into our development processes.