On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 6:42 PM Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > From: Minchan Kim <minchan@xxxxxxxxxx> > Subject: mm: use only pidfd for process_madvise syscall No. I'm not taking this crazy series. First we have patch 18/25, which introduces process_madvise() that takes a pidfd. Then we have patch 21/25, which says "There is a demand[1] to support pid as well pidfd for process_madvise.." and points to https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/9d849087-3359-c4ab-fbec-859e8186c509@xxxxxxxxxxxxx/ And then finally we have patch 24/25, which says "Based on discussion[1], people didn't feel we need to support both pid and pidfd for every new coming API[2] so this patch keeps only pidfd" and points to https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20200509124817.xmrvsrq3mla6b76k@wittgenstein/ Fine. Discussion is good. But this patch-series is crazy, and I refuse to take this kind of schizophrenic patches that can't make up their mind. Make up your mind, dammit! Don't send me patches that vacillate between two standpoints and make the history and the eventual final end result really hard to tell. What will it be tomorrow? Another two patches that decide to go the other way and then back? I'm going to flush this whole madvise patch-set down the toilet, because after having this kind of whip-lash looking through it, I can't take it any more. So all of 17-25 are just going in the garbage until people can make up their minds. Linus
