On Tue, Feb 13, 2024 at 11:04:58PM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote: > On 13.02.24 22:58, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 13, 2024 at 4:24 AM Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > On Mon 12-02-24 13:38:46, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: > > > [...] > > > > We're aiming to get this in the next merge window, for 6.9. The feedback > > > > we've gotten has been that even out of tree this patchset has already > > > > been useful, and there's a significant amount of other work gated on the > > > > code tagging functionality included in this patchset [2]. > > > > > > I suspect it will not come as a surprise that I really dislike the > > > implementation proposed here. I will not repeat my arguments, I have > > > done so on several occasions already. > > > > > > Anyway, I didn't go as far as to nak it even though I _strongly_ believe > > > this debugging feature will add a maintenance overhead for a very long > > > time. I can live with all the downsides of the proposed implementation > > > _as long as_ there is a wider agreement from the MM community as this is > > > where the maintenance cost will be payed. So far I have not seen (m)any > > > acks by MM developers so aiming into the next merge window is more than > > > little rushed. > > > > We tried other previously proposed approaches and all have their > > downsides without making maintenance much easier. Your position is > > understandable and I think it's fair. Let's see if others see more > > benefit than cost here. > > Would it make sense to discuss that at LSF/MM once again, especially > covering why proposed alternatives did not work out? LSF/MM is not "too far" > away (May). > > I recall that the last LSF/MM session on this topic was a bit unfortunate > (IMHO not as productive as it could have been). Maybe we can finally reach a > consensus on this. I'd rather not delay for more bikeshedding. Before agreeing to LSF I'd need to see a serious proposl - what we had at the last LSF was people jumping in with half baked alternative proposals that very much hadn't been thought through, and I see no need to repeat that. Like I mentioned, there's other work gated on this patchset; if people want to hold this up for more discussion they better be putting forth something to discuss.
