From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (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 DFD244DB567; Fri, 25 Sep 2026 15:58:38 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1790351922; cv=none; b=YrsWisy4prGpuQgakmuYwfbpwd1rP3R/mdtmnQsmfWjgCDsKWR4+YYq+zOyHyLD4U+rpd1qkN5Jm1RPfmLruaOAKvaFSfoXEF+THmJT/yaUn5Sl+1d2OmvN2E+/NbTPCNURSjZF/+evEJDsY7vQnUzmu5ptQwuuUMBBjq7YChRk= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1790351922; c=relaxed/simple; bh=qR8azvgZfaRgE4wOVbNM1K5aJXx9TItF6h8M3YodUMk=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=FyLn7jt4/QbN6+7aGvhCL9Xh9AXDMlMcm0WypATo96KeiYknCZt3p4cvcbDA8PUDCA7roP21U7Q/PITTyCAaU+YDlFu01qYEKp7Mj5zHz8in/85dCT+mw+xlZtYznajOcEi+V5KY6vXzyadUqLsIdfmhCc1UsHElBKKWoNMkI7I= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=SgZQLK/Z; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="SgZQLK/Z" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B7C781F000FF; Fri, 25 Sep 2026 15:58:34 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1790351916; bh=qR8azvgZfaRgE4wOVbNM1K5aJXx9TItF6h8M3YodUMk=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=SgZQLK/ZjTy0c1dNQAGHBfjxb6+BScZ4bBrLAmKMtrAjFjBCc474psP22+z9Q7xbF DLvGeI0/5a86Cg111z8elU1nj9UDgNB9FgPIf+OtNj7PrPff30k1WdbFXon7D7eWNH uZH5gkis5ea40x1CD5tlZTwvy/KMyX4c/1Ra+1/8g2N7h0fd9aNsjyYIypYwRhWeSI Yb/ngp7yrqGrT8odRHzIJY0kwFKBVKHn20+desMT8QYhhMhFfu1wpraK1V/jsMRMIw 3oym+6bAQgvvUCIuC29xsJafd8BSCe+4/cyW7txTLiI/9gsjhuz3U1o8rugfeA0cEU N5qKTjaS0cx8A== Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2026 16:58:32 +0100 From: "Lorenzo Stoakes (ARM)" To: Andrew Morton , "Liam R. Howlett" , Vlastimil Babka , Jann Horn , Pedro Falcato , David Hildenbrand , Suren Baghdasaryan Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, sashiko@lists.linux.dev, Konstantin Ryabitsev Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 00/40] mm: make VMA flag semantics explicit, eliminate VM_SPECIAL Message-ID: References: <20260917-b4-mmap-prepare-vma-flag-sanify-v3-0-4583d8a23bca@kernel.org> 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-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20260917-b4-mmap-prepare-vma-flag-sanify-v3-0-4583d8a23bca@kernel.org> < Edit mailing list, +sashiko as I gather this kind of feedback is wanted? :) > I usually don't report it, but here's an example of some false positives, which sashiko regenerates on respin. Specifically the 2/40 (high) report was valid, as raised by Gregory and now addressed ready for v4. The ones on 1/40 (high), the other 2 on 4/40 (medium, medium) and the one on 24/40 (low) were all just wrong. The one on 8/40 is bit but had some semblence of logic, but still not something I'll take action on. So a false positive rate of 83.3% here, or 67.7% if you exclude the 'meh' one. In general I've continued to find the rate to be 50% at best, and it has not improved over time. It also seems that low/medium reports (which I think were disabled before?) are particularly bad. (I thought those were previously disabled for being inaccurate?) I realise everybody is busy, but it'd be nice to have a means of marking individual reports as hallucinations. Thanks! -- Cheers, Lorenzo