On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 03:21:48PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: >On Tue 27-03-18 19:54:35, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: >> On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 09:06:37AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: >> > So by no means the MM backports were reviewed by me. And considering how hard >> > it is to get any review for MM patches in general I strongly suspect that >> > others didn't review either. >> > >> > In general I am quite skeptical about the automagic backports >> > selections, to be honest. MM patches should be reasonably good at >> > selecting stable backports and adding more patches on top just risks >> > regressions. >> >> BTW other than suggesting we needing *actual review* of the MM patches, are >> there known unit tests which could be run as well? Thinking long term. > >There are some in selftests but most fixes are quite hard to get a >specialized testcase for. Rememeber the MM is a pile of heuristics to >handle large scale of workloads. Would running mmtests for each patch help here at all? -- Thanks, Sasha-- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
