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 E14C1EE4990 for ; Tue, 30 Dec 2025 18:13:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 361936B0088; Tue, 30 Dec 2025 13:13:35 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 30F9C6B0089; Tue, 30 Dec 2025 13:13:35 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 23C716B008A; Tue, 30 Dec 2025 13:13:35 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0013.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.13]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10B406B0088 for ; Tue, 30 Dec 2025 13:13:35 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin10.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay10.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D48CC178C for ; Tue, 30 Dec 2025 18:13:34 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 84276935148.10.8774F3C Received: from out-186.mta0.migadu.com (out-186.mta0.migadu.com [91.218.175.186]) by imf02.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C09968000D for ; Tue, 30 Dec 2025 18:13:32 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf02.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=linux.dev header.s=key1 header.b=iWRHPxUK; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=linux.dev; spf=pass (imf02.hostedemail.com: domain of shakeel.butt@linux.dev designates 91.218.175.186 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=shakeel.butt@linux.dev ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1767118413; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=Y9w0CF7YZoNIjx3TSprHnfY9tBMTvpfEcl/hT2vVq1f7ejFAkGkle8+8gmihJB2gbtYbQX EfnziEGHg8xPuNblGrJMMfaEnTadykBINqd9aMjPltC4dOv75y+visiuAbqIBffuLz5zaS g0P3q/qy8m5H8aahFJcG+03Y33I/TaE= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf02.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=linux.dev header.s=key1 header.b=iWRHPxUK; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=linux.dev; spf=pass (imf02.hostedemail.com: domain of shakeel.butt@linux.dev designates 91.218.175.186 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=shakeel.butt@linux.dev ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1767118413; 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:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:dkim-signature; bh=2KIbte4AjguXPg7uu7NhV6x7iy3noJMlW4r9WgTskaI=; b=HXoo51CHNbntG4jaYlI1EHM815um4BLp3pbOApvuUELfjClxuL+E6PtRFm0HKirA6snIgM qATdiOn8NHMWNFmJ9WnhR6Yc1S3T6N46GrBBXxtEmMJXpM7IfnKYVEnP4dkZTbuPR5kvR8 T4/vJkIOqN6zQEI5R8ME8rDzEy5DtC0= Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2025 10:13:22 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.dev; s=key1; t=1767118410; h=from:from: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:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=2KIbte4AjguXPg7uu7NhV6x7iy3noJMlW4r9WgTskaI=; b=iWRHPxUK6bUIObUiOlm47FeYyctHwFJnt3AZeHE7kRDgg7NfSbQ/zb9FdNxilYaDhuey2q dbYCTZ5wzOJY9E53RProjDZDQtV6nCjKBijiZ7OAW5QC5xviyqhQLuAzPvqkzQb8/AAdN8 46d5J5BuBO23NZsPaS3EiyWJLf2PTDM= X-Report-Abuse: Please report any abuse attempt to abuse@migadu.com and include these headers. From: Shakeel Butt To: Zi Yan Cc: Roman Gushchin , Qi Zheng , hannes@cmpxchg.org, hughd@google.com, mhocko@suse.com, muchun.song@linux.dev, david@kernel.org, lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com, harry.yoo@oracle.com, imran.f.khan@oracle.com, kamalesh.babulal@oracle.com, axelrasmussen@google.com, yuanchu@google.com, weixugc@google.com, chenridong@huaweicloud.com, mkoutny@suse.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, hamzamahfooz@linux.microsoft.com, apais@linux.microsoft.com, lance.yang@linux.dev, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, Qi Zheng , Chris Mason Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/28] Eliminate Dying Memory Cgroup Message-ID: References: <7ia4ldikrbsj.fsf@castle.c.googlers.com> <1fe35038-abe1-4103-b5de-81e2b422bd21@linux.dev> <87tsx861o5.fsf@linux.dev> <03C3C4D4-DC37-4A2F-AFFA-AACC32BAEBEF@nvidia.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <03C3C4D4-DC37-4A2F-AFFA-AACC32BAEBEF@nvidia.com> X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: C09968000D X-Rspamd-Server: rspam03 X-Stat-Signature: 6prs7m5ra4k65pudzoo9691itgd1kgrn X-Rspam-User: X-HE-Tag: 1767118412-500392 X-HE-Meta: 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 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: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On Tue, Dec 30, 2025 at 11:46:02AM -0500, Zi Yan wrote: > On 29 Dec 2025, at 23:48, Shakeel Butt wrote: > > > On Tue, Dec 30, 2025 at 12:25:31PM +0800, Qi Zheng wrote: > >> > >> > > [...] > >>>> > >>>> Thank you for running the AI review for this patchset, but please do not > >>>> directly send the raw data from the AI review to the community, as this > >>>> is no different from automated review by a robot. > >>> > >>> Hi Qi, > >>> > >>> I don't know why you're so negative towards it. It's been great at > >> > >> No, I don't object to having a dedicated robot to do this. > >> > >>> finding pretty tricky bugs often missed by human reviewers. In no way > >>> it's a replacement for human reviews, but if a robot can find real > >>> issues and make the kernel more reliable and safe, I'm in. > >> > >> I just think you should do a preliminary review of the AI ​​review results > >> instead of sending them out directly. Otherwise, if everyone does this, > >> the community will be full of bots. > >> > >> No? > >> > > > > We don't want too many bots but we definitely want at least one AI > > review bot. Now we have precedence of BPF and networking subsystem and > > the results I have seen are really good. I think the MM community needs > > to come together and decide on the formalities of AI review process and > > I see Roman is doing some early experimentation and result looks great. > > Do you mind explaining why the result looks great? Does it mean you agree > the regressions pointed out by the AI review? The result looks great because the points raised are really thought provoking and things I have not thought about when I reviewed the series. The lru lock without irq or the possible infinite retry loop in get_mem_cgroup_from_folio() are two such examples. Are these real regressions? I am not sure. > > If we want to do AI reviews, the process should be improved instead of > just pasting the output from AI. In the initial stage, I think some human > intervention is needed, at least adding some comment on AI reviews would > be helpful. Yes I agree and therefore I mentioned we should discuss how should we (MM community) should adopt the AI reviews. > Otherwise, it looks like you agree completely with AI reviews. > In addition, “50% of the reported issues are real”, is the AI tossing > a coin when reporting issues? > > When I am looking into the prompt part, I have the following questions: > > 1. What is “Prompts SHA: 192922ae6bf4 ("bpf.md: adjust the documentation > about bpf kfunc parameter validation”)”? I got the actual prompts > from irc: https://github.com/masoncl/review-prompts/tree/main, but it > should be provided along with the review for others to reproduce. I agree and I didn't know that Chris's review prompts are used here. Ccing Chris for your following questions. > > 2. Looking at the mm prompt: https://github.com/masoncl/review-prompts/blob/main/mm.md, are you sure the patterns are all right? > a. Page/Folio States, Large folios require per-page state tracking for > Reference counts. I thought we want to get rid of per page refcount. > b. Migration Invariants, NUMA balancing expects valid PTE combinations. > PROTNONE PTEs are hardware invalid to trigger fault. > c. TLB flushes required after PTE modifications. How about spurious fault > handling? > > 3. For a cgroup patchset, I was expecting some cgroup specific prompt rules, > but could not find any. What am I missing? > >