On Thu, Apr 7, 2022 at 2:31 AM Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi Yu, > > On Wed, 6 Apr 2022 21:24:27 -0600 Yu Zhao <yuzhao@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Can you please include this patchset in linux-next? Git repo for you to fetch: > > > > https://linux-mm.googlesource.com/mglru for-linux-next > > I get a message saying "This repository is empty. Push to it to show > branches and history." :-( Sorry about this. It should work now. > > My goal is to get additional test coverage before I send a pull > > request for 5.19 to Linus. > > Good idea :-) > > > I've explored all avenues, but ultimately I've failed to rally > > substantial support from the MM stakeholders [1]. There are no pending > > technical issues against this patchset [2]. What is more concerning > > are the fundamental disagreements on priorities, methodologies, etc. > > that are not specific to this patchset and have been hindering our > > progress as a collective. (Cheers to the mutual dissatisfaction.) > > I have not been following the discussion as I am not an mm person, but > this is not a good sign. > > > While we plan to discuss those issues during the LSFMM next month, it > > doesn't seem reasonable to leave this patchset hanging in the air, > > since it has reached its maturity a while ago and there are strong > > demands from downstream kernels as well as a large user base. Thus I > > sent that pull request to Linus a couple of weeks ago, implying that > > he would have to make the final decision soon. > > > > I hope this gives enough background about what's been going on with > > this patchset. If you decide to take it and it causes you any > > troubles, please feel free to yell at me. > > > > Thanks! > > > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220104202227.2903605-1-yuzhao@xxxxxxxxxx/ > > [2] https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220326010003.3155137-1-yuzhao@xxxxxxxxxx/ > > I had a look at those threads and I guess things are better that your > comment above implies. > > 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. > 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 :) [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/YdSuSHa%2FVjl6bPkg@xxxxxxxxxx/ [2] https://lore.kernel.org/r/YdiKVJlClB3h1Kmg@xxxxxxxxxx/ [3] https://lore.kernel.org/r/YgR+MfXjpg82QyBT@xxxxxxxxxx/ [4] https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220326134928.ad739eeecd5d0855dbdc6257@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
