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]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E815DF44868 for ; Fri, 10 Apr 2026 13:50:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 57A726B00AA; Fri, 10 Apr 2026 09:50:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 551886B00AB; Fri, 10 Apr 2026 09:50:28 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 48F166B00AD; Fri, 10 Apr 2026 09:50:28 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0010.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.10]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36CDD6B00AA for ; Fri, 10 Apr 2026 09:50:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin06.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay09.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B00578BEFB for ; Fri, 10 Apr 2026 13:50:27 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 84642780894.06.3190CCF Received: from tor.source.kernel.org (tor.source.kernel.org [172.105.4.254]) by imf22.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48ACDC000E for ; Fri, 10 Apr 2026 13:50:26 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf22.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=kernel.org header.s=k20201202 header.b=GPqER8zB; spf=pass (imf22.hostedemail.com: domain of ljs@kernel.org designates 172.105.4.254 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=ljs@kernel.org; dmarc=pass (policy=quarantine) header.from=kernel.org ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1775829026; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=7KZQjKIpHIRezQs5yYOag5hT8gxr30scULwK0ybI5DGY+XfZYScAefQe/DqKy/qdE4oqEn hKUyswchbegX3BP2/9crhK+4gcScj1e5/hOaVjDtKfADdYDAJGtuv8WmC8RHtxEyArN+km IlHv7qf16JhYP7tmC8qjKVguULCYu/I= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1775829026; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:dkim-signature; bh=39NAX6pobMDiRW03bJAv0Hw/rcf7l7+Va+PozAyLXsE=; b=zLHR8UegCx+RVC5STM5QXVwLf2mmtBTAigEuEA9DaMBjRaiwhBhjncL/amTQTCJowbzqDh bFngnjBBNmIxYQSt9A7UmJuY4qbyO5+esu/CWp0FUv1eSL4JeLJlG3JImJWZkyn2Rla9te fhMoiEKpq9y1b8Fqc0oP5uLgPmCByWY= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf22.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=kernel.org header.s=k20201202 header.b=GPqER8zB; spf=pass (imf22.hostedemail.com: domain of ljs@kernel.org designates 172.105.4.254 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=ljs@kernel.org; dmarc=pass (policy=quarantine) header.from=kernel.org Received: from smtp.kernel.org (transwarp.subspace.kernel.org [100.75.92.58]) by tor.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53EA26024D; Fri, 10 Apr 2026 13:50:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 53559C19425; Fri, 10 Apr 2026 13:50:17 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1775829025; bh=39NAX6pobMDiRW03bJAv0Hw/rcf7l7+Va+PozAyLXsE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=GPqER8zBALj1mdN+bTW+ENjK3Iz9tCxXSiON1IrcWMBqckqHOkL8gmJsZHFDpoSn3 fNnkNhnuM8YALPABGCBGy1pGA3Enr10HET+x/Id1HYgTr9mx/LOETSJmhxv0gYAGug uUPS20jrknJe95xMg9xHnK4DfOg6cHnr4oAgLSJPSYAxGvd1jsK7ROVuYyMsTxCE/v cVyf89R3C32BrRXnmutnmp/+5Z35DNV3USKJol8er2b/ZJcfGJ+QIngV6CVQWKmw+e 1glwA8bGhawBmt7WXCthBv4XrTFKn8hGxRGo7w4aCbqGZJsaZOcatLYCgiHmhrWemJ HT08plIvK5jhA== Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2026 14:50:14 +0100 From: Lorenzo Stoakes To: "Vlastimil Babka (SUSE)" Cc: Usama Arif , Andrew Morton , david@kernel.org, willy@infradead.org, ryan.roberts@arm.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, r@hev.cc, jack@suse.cz, ajd@linux.ibm.com, apopple@nvidia.com, baohua@kernel.org, baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com, brauner@kernel.org, catalin.marinas@arm.com, dev.jain@arm.com, kees@kernel.org, kevin.brodsky@arm.com, lance.yang@linux.dev, Liam.Howlett@oracle.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mhocko@suse.com, npache@redhat.com, pasha.tatashin@soleen.com, rmclure@linux.ibm.com, rppt@kernel.org, surenb@google.com, Al Viro , ziy@nvidia.com, hannes@cmpxchg.org, kas@kernel.org, shakeel.butt@linux.dev, leitao@debian.org, kernel-team@meta.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/4] mm: improve large folio readahead and alignment for exec memory Message-ID: References: <20260402181326.3107102-1-usama.arif@linux.dev> <803a0c15-0a6a-4c00-b6b3-eaae56d5fc15@linux.dev> <5f99b289-629c-47c4-bef0-966d6678a2a8@linux.dev> <40f31e5a-7161-4b17-af03-52b3a28a113e@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <40f31e5a-7161-4b17-af03-52b3a28a113e@kernel.org> X-Rspam-User: X-Rspamd-Server: rspam11 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 48ACDC000E X-Stat-Signature: gtj8begqi9j1pz7ma15sdn4eru8hs8hb X-HE-Tag: 1775829026-762778 X-HE-Meta: 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 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On Fri, Apr 10, 2026 at 03:29:12PM +0200, Vlastimil Babka (SUSE) wrote: > On 4/10/26 14:24, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 10, 2026 at 01:19:08PM +0100, Usama Arif wrote: > >> >> Thanks, Lorenzo > >> > > >> > (Note that we're in a 'quiet period' from here until -rc1 of next cycle and > >> > won't be taking anything new until then. We plan to do this from around rc5 or > >> > rc6 of each cycle in future). > >> > >> Thanks! Just wanted to check, as I am always confused about this. Is it ok > >> to send patches for review for next release at this time? So that they > >> are in a good state when rc1 comes. I wanted to send PMD swap entries > >> for review after I am finished testing, but I want them for review for > >> next release. > > > > I think different people have different views on that :) > > > > I mean it's debateable whether having a glut of new material on day one of -rc1 > > is preferable to having a bunch come in that might or might not get lost along > > the way :) > > > > I personally feel it'd be better to send during the cycle window rather than > > before but I suspect others disagree with that! > > > > So from your point of view, feel free to do what you like, but maybe David + > > others would want to chime in with their opinions? > > For me the more important part of the quiet period is that patches can't be > merged, so there's less urgency to review them immediately. So I think it's > fine to still send patches, but not having expectations about quick > response, as people might be taking time off. > > On the other hand it would be better if new series could mature in this > quiet period, so there would be less work after rc1. But the key to making > that possible I think is to feel less urgency/being overwhelmed also in the > non-quiet period (rc1-rc5/6). Then it's should be less necessary to take > time off during the quiet period. So hopefully we'll get there through > involving more reviewers, and by having more submaintainers agency. Yeah I sympathise with that. But until we for-sure have signoff, I worry about the risk of series 'just being taken' at -rc1 because it maybe seems easier to do that, and then we have a series from 5 weeks ago you forgot about suddenly crop up. So I guess the more nuanced take I have is: Once we have a robust set up end-to-end _that can handle_ having series that are deferred to next cycle without risk of things getting mixed up - then that makes sense, yes. But while there's still a bit of uncertainty around that, then I'd rather not. But I think if people DO just resend their stuff in -rc1 then we're OK and it addresses my concerns. One thing we could do here is to tag series appropriately like: [PATCH v7.2] 00/42 To make it clear where it's intended to head to. P.S. Having the 'quiet period' REALLY REALLY helps. So thanks for that Andrew! > > Vlastimil Thanks, Lorenzo