From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88597C433F5 for ; Fri, 8 Apr 2022 02:09:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id C0AAA6B0071; Thu, 7 Apr 2022 22:09:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id BBA826B0072; Thu, 7 Apr 2022 22:09:20 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id A817A6B0074; Thu, 7 Apr 2022 22:09:20 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (relay.a.hostedemail.com [64.99.140.24]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A0EF6B0071 for ; Thu, 7 Apr 2022 22:09:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin20.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay13.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61C2160270 for ; Fri, 8 Apr 2022 02:09:20 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 79332079680.20.C32E272 Received: from mail-vs1-f49.google.com (mail-vs1-f49.google.com [209.85.217.49]) by imf25.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2C4EA0007 for ; Fri, 8 Apr 2022 02:09:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-vs1-f49.google.com with SMTP id a127so5421497vsa.3 for ; Thu, 07 Apr 2022 19:09:19 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=Z0Qp7Yu0DBCRj1c8Wq8BvL9+iH9DKnierxKEWSMuj1A=; b=Zfdn9yf2N3tSdFK9CPpFN9l1Xg3YPG0WlnBAzf+DH8b2G2orW6EFhxiI0Pr+YgZpth veyUHtT2+2NlwUMOLJOH0uDzGELFgiagnJ1nnejf4FS77CFM5ftoqbaTcLdwz4PsNkxd QsNtImak6ce3HBvVPLjtMoBN7Ozr6WSHSUE7/DSFgUVAKzV2WhP0bBbxRK/yTEd1B2Od o8rY8pYr2Rxyvv61DtledlxZztsIWpGY4DV8NrSLLN+m6xgScP4WtXGePYxgCzIBE7bm xGGPi18ju+WaFsS0ANGoGAULK7heexzzowMR2UIhNtqHLimWCwxgiq/BZpz5//D+HYrn 3lGA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Z0Qp7Yu0DBCRj1c8Wq8BvL9+iH9DKnierxKEWSMuj1A=; b=h4N/BgpV/etqmLCfbyKWbsD5afIlHZqNyrupMW2Ss0YQUKHMyGCtw1omTdIXWtBw6/ QJBfPqU+MknnpZ26GqsCOAdllVtI8dz5FJ5oyzncCgYkqbZhZmUm2U64pU8hTwn8pfpy qmrRQ7ocsUQaNJzean12Wc++pJGAceeeJzCQbTvUMKIFHoQg0kKuN+ac/QLKT1+vINAR 0DRpzZ18Y2btrTVdraiNhOcs3M3wAgJ/pD0AJDITbrtOYDFA0aD5Fme8wNcyK8LOUnH2 ucR4GQwbm35PK0ZmWPdfz6DWuf7YVXEN9BETu86413O08XLfnXL22rCzBZ6Pbx9SWGbQ CqHA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5315PfSYKIjoMB4tHXbzrdNGcIf3eR3FQbi+4lTpHnpw5CLXYab9 bjCWFI97CkB0yayiJxCxQUazsg8tNtNuU3DDcBiGbQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwUZIDsaHJwpCof+f66Zu32Q3dHG70av+1BA38l3kjKLGbhm7LjGQqxI88AKvIaDFQrOR5DTJ/8oM8dJZQiSZI= X-Received: by 2002:a67:fbcf:0:b0:325:6e61:4290 with SMTP id o15-20020a67fbcf000000b003256e614290mr5275653vsr.22.1649383759039; Thu, 07 Apr 2022 19:09:19 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20220407031525.2368067-1-yuzhao@google.com> <20220407183112.2cb5b627@canb.auug.org.au> <20220407221354.5acc2711@canb.auug.org.au> In-Reply-To: <20220407221354.5acc2711@canb.auug.org.au> From: Yu Zhao Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2022 20:08:43 -0600 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 00/14] Multi-Gen LRU Framework To: Stephen Rothwell , Andrew Morton Cc: Linux-MM , Andi Kleen , Aneesh Kumar , Barry Song <21cnbao@gmail.com>, Catalin Marinas , Dave Hansen , Hillf Danton , Jens Axboe , Jesse Barnes , Johannes Weiner , Jonathan Corbet , Linus Torvalds , Matthew Wilcox , Mel Gorman , Michael Larabel , Michal Hocko , Mike Rapoport , Rik van Riel , Vlastimil Babka , Will Deacon , Ying Huang , Linux ARM , "open list:DOCUMENTATION" , linux-kernel , Kernel Page Reclaim v2 , "the arch/x86 maintainers" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Rspam-User: Authentication-Results: imf25.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=google.com header.s=20210112 header.b=Zfdn9yf2; spf=pass (imf25.hostedemail.com: domain of yuzhao@google.com designates 209.85.217.49 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=yuzhao@google.com; dmarc=pass (policy=reject) header.from=google.com X-Rspamd-Server: rspam03 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: F2C4EA0007 X-Stat-Signature: paa66p9xhtqzex4qdbtbjn8do6jjaya3 X-HE-Tag: 1649383759-622419 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Thu, Apr 7, 2022 at 6:14 AM Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Hi, > > On Thu, 7 Apr 2022 03:41:15 -0600 Yu Zhao wrote: > > > > > So, a couple of questions: > > > > > > Have you done a trial merge with a current linux-next tree to see what > > > sort of mess/pain we may already be in? > > > > Yes, the repo I prepared for you is based on the latest linux-next. > > There shouldn't be any conflicts. > > Ah, that is a problem :-( I can't merge a branch into linux-next if > that branch is based on linux-next itself. linux-next rebases > everyday, so that merge would bring in the previous version of > linux-next - including other branches that may have rebased :-( > > All the branches in linux-next need to be based on Linus' tree or some > tree that does not rebase (or one you can keep up with if it does > rebase). > > The only exception is part of Andrew's patch series which is rebased > (by me) on top of linux-next each day. Gotcha. > > > Is it all stable enough now that it could be sent as a patch series for > > > Andrew to include in mmotm (with perhaps just smallish followup patches)? > > > > Yes, on multiple occasions, e.g., [1][2][3], I've claimed this > > patchset has an unprecedented test coverage and nobody has proven > > otherwise so far. > > > > Andrew suggested a cycle in linux-next [4]. So here we are :) > > So the easiest thing for me is if Andrew takes it into his mmotm patch > series (most of which ends up in linux-next). Agreed. > Otherwise I am probably > at some point going to need help fixing the conflicts. Yes, very likely. I see three options at the moment: 1. I grab mmotm, rebase it, apply this patchset atop and then route it to you. Based on my rough understanding of your workflow, this might reduce the work on your side. 2. I skip linux-next, and when I send the pull request for 5.19, I'll include incentive for Linus to potentially forgo the required linux-next cycle. 3. You or Andrew would have to do something you/he might not enjoy :) Please let me know. Thanks!