From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=95.215.58.170 ARC-Seal: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; t=1794310477; b=CVlR+l4JqkAgjGDu6UTSVqbNL2gaCh3LtYXudIzse33B3f3jKcNzTcxhr5lKPWGTINeX s0FGTnWdaFJaSQvlTmn3BZYlTBawNkrM9BMWS3JGeW8K2ElU5MrKwhnoUdfSNvhNFZQ7i /H9bubF9tzLR2o3A7luLu24BC5mG5F9FoXVcwSjFd+vUz6rC4d1A0kC/FzQ19DvyehKAy /3NysYvDh/hBguEbUha9XPqGolKBFHoO2W1Z7LVldd0eKL8N9hK2lMQCgPdUFgP3i7jMd frqB/dYPvvBdPiEczW5ncadX+qaLcfOesFOk5JskleuL2IIEd7yUU1RvX2K8Uwoniug== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1794310477; h=DMARC-Filter:X-Envelope-To:DKIM-Signature:X-Envelope-To:Received: X-Mizu-Trace-ID:X-Migadu-Flow:Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID: References:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; bh=O2a1TDsS3iUxIM92pLHqfLDtktPZ6Hk3khSHvckjZDU=; b=B+eueRP1CGIk0p9CMqqy/7WltbUMhgRgG/QkEZd1yNmTcFyb9HRNxF/sW/8bjgye7OU+ drKC3Rpkjnpj7/+3llHw+ou8yBmPG/fQslgb14Pj7lH/uKJvoOjO5id1rj+fOImL18ABy 0ouOk2zLJEEScdkx4KGHasg6M+3nyeXaHxFqbKjUypSTopWdc6IemOEPYkp8u6aCaXOKY WCJ5CfjzZM57aWDPkB/Jb/nFL2dOKamt9O3GLHGtFPtnxiQmzkpH1HOnqOkr2oIpM+yyf TJqv+OvVqi9kZubQZNq3BFzwI77OvzqY0E1sz47DcWomip/4Oj6kk/nKr9NWKJmtaew== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass header.from=linux.dev; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev; dkim=pass header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=key1 header.b=qZPqylz3; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=95.215.58.170 Received: from mta1.migadu.com (out-170.mta1.migadu.com [95.215.58.170]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (prime256v1) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5556C606A331 for ; Tue, 10 Nov 2026 11:34:36 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 smtp.subspace.kernel.org 5556C606A331 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key, unprotected) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=key1 header.b=qZPqylz3 X-Envelope-To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; bh=sx7YNgEU9+H0zh4XLdzTGH7bAYCesjUaRhN37pRVeCo=; c=simple/simple; d=linux.dev; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type; s=key1; t=1794310474; v=1; x=1794915274; b=qZPqylz30aZ3e2BfZqsTlDRz+1A5BGW9qBCxc3KAgoelfm0jerbLRA5Mf59vl44Y4zV6fsTz I3Grq8ySLHtOt8IhhKwwnmYkw0eLgOyUZSDb/nVE9HYSLcWzf1/h9RUK0RhrHwMkYAjeU8wm6zz lU+CKzCBZOJ7GsPG8EUt6gB0= X-Envelope-To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Received: by mta10.migadu.com with ESMTPS id 8d782ae6a49889d8; Tue, 10 Nov 2026 11:34:34 +0000 X-Mizu-Trace-ID: 8d782ae6a49889d8 X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2026 19:34:21 +0800 From: "Xu Xin (vivo)" To: "Lorenzo Stoakes (ARM)" Cc: David Hildenbrand , Chengming Zhou , Andrew Morton , Vlastimil Babka , Mike Rapoport , Suren Baghdasaryan , Jonathan Corbet , Jinjiang Tu , Qiliang Yuan , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, Huan Yang , Wang Xiao Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] KSM: introduce only_merge_zero_pages Message-ID: References: <20261110074312.219847-1-xu.xin@linux.dev> 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 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Tue, Nov 10, 2026 at 10:08:00AM +0000, Lorenzo Stoakes (ARM) wrote: > All-in-all this seems to be adding more complexity to a current major AI bugfix > target, in a cycle where we're not really looking for significant new > functionality. > > So given [0] I wonder if this could be deferred to the next cycle? David, what > do you think? > > In any case the code is pretty rough from a scan (I reviewed one of the commits > to have a mini-dig) and looks very LLM-generated. > > It needs _human_ polishing before we could take it regardless. I don't mind deferring this to the next cycle. Also, the patches themselves are all written by Jinjiang and me; some of the descriptions may have been translated or generated with LLM, which helps improve efficiency for non-native English speakers like me. If you don't like that style, I'll try to avoid it and write the commit messages manually. Thanks. > > And additionally, you are shoving yet more logic into already horribly massive > functions in dire need of rework. > > Sorry but the technical debt does have to be paid at some point, so I think this > would need some initial patches doing something about that before the rest of it > anyway. Fine, I'll try but it's not that easy to refactor scan_get_next_rmap_item(). > > [0]:https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/a2f584f6-e382-4876-aa6d-d5a34de6ee59@kernel.org/ > > -- > Cheers, Lorenzo