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 66E46C7EE21 for ; Wed, 3 May 2023 15:49:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id F41146B0082; Wed, 3 May 2023 11:49:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id EC9B06B0083; Wed, 3 May 2023 11:49:34 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id D918A6B0085; Wed, 3 May 2023 11:49:34 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from bedivere.hansenpartnership.com (bedivere.hansenpartnership.com [96.44.175.130]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF86E6B0082 for ; Wed, 3 May 2023 11:49:34 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=hansenpartnership.com; s=20151216; t=1683128971; bh=aZHv4qLewpPoN2a7Dp1hmQ518n6knm526HL7tro2+QQ=; h=Message-ID:Subject:From:To:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=RuzgPwW7Excw6pez9bbQH1LgK0+PrOgDucE8mX352a/WgEFXdVcyXswKLkwHVN4FK NRRB6IArfDLzoJ2Y5xkv3PNA1E6ef4irPxZ/JjdOQrfSM2D4MyBH3rpgG/WnwCUFYL KRr071rSZhNhJKS7IDpjG6MPN5NNicYHXLH+D7mM= Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bedivere.hansenpartnership.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1128B128171B; Wed, 3 May 2023 11:49:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from bedivere.hansenpartnership.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (bedivere.hansenpartnership.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavis, port 10024) with ESMTP id h_67IzqxhgtW; Wed, 3 May 2023 11:49:30 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=hansenpartnership.com; s=20151216; t=1683128970; bh=aZHv4qLewpPoN2a7Dp1hmQ518n6knm526HL7tro2+QQ=; h=Message-ID:Subject:From:To:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=q0tL2VdkMVextXF7i8wLij4wc+Rv8eXjweyKXiHti73zJxCRaSCu25jteEhbnxI6v yK9rK8oceeU4P+nNqywZMzxEdAYo1SWnGfe4NiTdtA5ocsYJMypoTDNv+p+Qwjz8wz oLVM+AAJEgGOGX5BoVd44tXyBl3Vu996X/awzutg= Received: from lingrow.int.hansenpartnership.com (unknown [IPv6:2601:5c4:4302:c21::a774]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (prime256v1) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by bedivere.hansenpartnership.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5B7F812805C5; Wed, 3 May 2023 11:49:25 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/40] Memory allocation profiling From: James Bottomley To: Kent Overstreet Cc: Petr =?UTF-8?Q?Tesa=C5=99=C3=ADk?= , Michal Hocko , Suren Baghdasaryan , akpm@linux-foundation.org, vbabka@suse.cz, hannes@cmpxchg.org, roman.gushchin@linux.dev, mgorman@suse.de, dave@stgolabs.net, willy@infradead.org, liam.howlett@oracle.com, corbet@lwn.net, void@manifault.com, peterz@infradead.org, juri.lelli@redhat.com, ldufour@linux.ibm.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com, will@kernel.org, arnd@arndb.de, tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com, dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, x86@kernel.org, peterx@redhat.com, david@redhat.com, axboe@kernel.dk, mcgrof@kernel.org, masahiroy@kernel.org, nathan@kernel.org, dennis@kernel.org, tj@kernel.org, muchun.song@linux.dev, rppt@kernel.org, paulmck@kernel.org, pasha.tatashin@soleen.com, yosryahmed@google.com, yuzhao@google.com, dhowells@redhat.com, hughd@google.com, andreyknvl@gmail.com, keescook@chromium.org, ndesaulniers@google.com, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, ebiggers@google.com, ytcoode@gmail.com, vincent.guittot@linaro.org, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com, rostedt@goodmis.org, bsegall@google.com, bristot@redhat.com, vschneid@redhat.com, cl@linux.com, penberg@kernel.org, iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com, 42.hyeyoo@gmail.com, glider@google.com, elver@google.com, dvyukov@google.com, shakeelb@google.com, songmuchun@bytedance.com, jbaron@akamai.com, rientjes@google.com, minchan@google.com, kaleshsingh@google.com, kernel-team@android.com, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, iommu@lists.linux.dev, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-modules@vger.kernel.org, kasan-dev@googlegroups.com, cgroups@vger.kernel.org Date: Wed, 03 May 2023 11:49:23 -0400 In-Reply-To: References: <20230501165450.15352-1-surenb@google.com> <20230503115051.30b8a97f@meshulam.tesarici.cz> <25a1ea786712df5111d7d1db42490624ac63651e.camel@HansenPartnership.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" User-Agent: Evolution 3.42.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 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 Wed, 2023-05-03 at 11:28 -0400, Kent Overstreet wrote: > On Wed, May 03, 2023 at 08:33:48AM -0400, James Bottomley wrote: > > On Wed, 2023-05-03 at 05:57 -0400, Kent Overstreet wrote: > > > On Wed, May 03, 2023 at 11:50:51AM +0200, Petr Tesařík wrote: > > > > If anyone ever wants to use this code tagging framework for > > > > something else, they will also have to convert relevant > > > > functions to macros, slowly changing the kernel to a minefield > > > > where local identifiers, struct, union and enum tags, field > > > > names and labels must avoid name conflict with a tagged > > > > function. For now, I have to remember that alloc_pages is > > > > forbidden, but the list may grow. > > > > > > Also, since you're not actually a kernel contributor yet... > > > > You have an amazing talent for being wrong.  But even if you were > > actually right about this, it would be an ad hominem personal > > attack on a new contributor which crosses the line into > > unacceptable behaviour on the list and runs counter to our code of > > conduct. > > ...Err, what? That was intended _in no way_ as a personal attack. Your reply went on to say "If you're going to comment, please do the necessary work to make sure you're saying something that makes sense." That is a personal attack belittling the person involved and holding them up for general contempt on the mailing list. This is exactly how we should *not* treat newcomers. > If I was mistaken I do apologize, but lately I've run across quite a > lot of people offering review feedback to patches I post that turn > out to have 0 or 10 patches in the kernel, and - to be blunt - a > pattern of offering feedback in strong language with a presumption of > experience that takes a lot to respond to adequately on a technical > basis. A synopsis of the feedback is that using macros to attach trace tags pollutes the global function namespace of the kernel. That's a valid observation and merits a technical not a personal response. James