From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; t=1794055328; b=2U7yXNedYKkydNPoJ/XE/Y4MAtAU3vk83kdY/0aSYrz/gr/xAnDbTfAdb+DuW4AnMynK Kp06UBFEjgV3YAHT+Q0y0G5E9dO8zf4A678yJEhVTBa33Z0Snm652dq/lyfGxP2xEdprT 9NYywf/osLzDpaOyTjcqEiTObdScpdfENXcaZ7Rp8nregm69+XDSOg3TMHuhjeu0mmLAF SqkhjBJYFvOObkS4ZAga18Qejk8ltlSeKCq4XfL1nZ04ogVUSsemSJUASILs/NpZAf4K8 WvwZD67FeAxuZgPkZd8nvkPm0R5FS2mm+b5a9VoqAQWzNXY9flhKuGr8LPrHAeMwYrQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1794055328; h=Received:DKIM-Signature:Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID: References:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; bh=cV4x1ttF2piQ+fPr0c3b26+zl31Ni+hq6coRnnOJGt4=; b=BYb+xUqSnh3K/KD5IraSxuz8uXqaVpDLjR9OFXFKA/SeP474RNmDQcC2RieoeINQaMen n6UvyXXuibu1oWkPwAhahRgllBznMdUvr1SaW0/dIRBUqYc7Xbbj+OwAzDoJJe87kLu5w gYDGZDNrO82JWDlTHNgaA9YuFUH+zCNTbYSShR7uUpBybdGMIQoiCV+tqEoJtlAgD1Dip GobYOg7PS2CwT8CtWqzXZMOqtYO3pEaXTouZU57pit//HYFFBgfkgw2THVMSd3Jo4aPYG W1SlAuF4NgfwUb5ReXwHmqgziOOn/6pfaBh/5Sxt8Z2Uyp5aoI5y9USlT/e4r63G3xA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=k20260515 header.b=JgHytq8+; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=100.103.45.18 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (quasi.space.kernel.org [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (prime256v1)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2159B606A326; Sat, 7 Nov 2026 12:42:07 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=k20260515 header.b=JgHytq8+ Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6B6081F0089F; Sat, 7 Nov 2026 12:42:07 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1794055327; bh=cV4x1ttF2piQ+fPr0c3b26+zl31Ni+hq6coRnnOJGt4=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=JgHytq8+LC4i1GMMDzJWG+4RP8UfKxpwPDZIewWf+awPTc104SO/aVMbC9ViRPzj2 xCfq+Al+UyosK37OFtU99ywsvzo9cVlhMIa019ZVVL2rjoCqO9ZKR2oojIa8ZN2Jhi aWjLJV5Y+ZKdUzXzTB5YgoHxNCGwgDCycLh7cyYV8khgxQ95Gc9iVvK2vXzDNsO30Q Ulf5574S6IHrv0/6HkRvvwsW6XgpwpUgF/eCsUYgSuh/svFb4e2Lo4Fp1K8l/3z9UD DhPNpCCP6XyuDFqK3mCvGX+I2wqcust+6l6qDZb6dJo4RwQ17ze2Nw1gpoq2O6SO70 yw9doaEZkuWQg== Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2026 07:42:06 -0500 From: Sasha Levin To: "David Hildenbrand (Arm)" Cc: Andrew Morton , Zi Yan , Baolin Wang , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] selftests/mm: add CONFIG_DEBUG_FS to the config fragment Message-ID: References: <20261105171801.2189772-1-sashal@kernel.org> <179397467526.9397.17872200045070830000.b4-ty@b4> <20261106185218.1766376-1-sashal@kernel.org> <8fdcef66-3130-4c90-aecb-050ae624f42c@kernel.org> 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=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <8fdcef66-3130-4c90-aecb-050ae624f42c@kernel.org> On Fri, Nov 06, 2026 at 10:32:27PM +0100, David Hildenbrand (Arm) wrote: >On 11/6/26 19:52, Sasha Levin wrote: >> On Fri, 06 Nov 2026 15:17:55 +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote: >>> [1/1] selftests/mm: add CONFIG_DEBUG_FS to the config fragment >>> https://git.kernel.org/mm/core/c/31ea5515 >> >> Thanks! It looks like this one landed on both thp-7.5.misc and >> core-7.5.misc: >> >> 31ea5515bf59 ("selftests/mm: add CONFIG_DEBUG_FS to the config fragment") >> 194b63198811 ("selftests/mm: add CONFIG_DEBUG_FS to the config fragment") >> >> Was the thp-7.5.misc one meant to be the split_huge_page_test skip patch? >> >> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20261105030242.1241448-1-sashal@kernel.org/ > >Fixes. > >b4 shazam gets confused when patches are sent in reply to patches. > >Which is why we shouldn't do it ;) Remember my gripe about how subsystems are starting to have more and more custom rules around process? :p Our docs currently say (Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst): Explicit In-Reply-To headers ---------------------------- It can be helpful to manually add In-Reply-To: headers to a patch (e.g., when using ``git send-email``) to associate the patch with previous relevant discussion, e.g. to link a bug fix to the email with the bug report. I suppose it's okay for parts of the kernel to deviate from the "standard", but it's a bit hard to keep track of these preferences. -- Thanks, Sasha