[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAKPOu+-4N7Zywp+Hdr9CNdO40gm=tAwD4O9M38d4rSdo5tzNRA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2025 08:06:50 +0200
From: Max Kellermann <max.kellermann@...os.com>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, david@...hat.com, axelrasmussen@...gle.com,
yuanchu@...gle.com, hughd@...gle.com, mhocko@...e.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com,
Liam.Howlett@...cle.com, vbabka@...e.cz, rppt@...nel.org, surenb@...gle.com,
vishal.moola@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 07/12] parisc/sys_parisc.c: add `const` to
mmap_upper_limit() parameter
On Mon, Sep 1, 2025 at 2:38 AM Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org> wrote:
> Since you're going to respin this series anyway, your tags are a
> disaster. Tags are not filenames. They're just to indicate to people
> that they should pay attention because it touches their area of
> interest. So this one should just be labelled "parisc:", not
> "parisc/sys_parisc.c:"
OK, "parisc:" is understood - but what tag shall I use for all the
other patches? They're all subsystem "mm". Are they supposed to all
have the same subject? My initial post had that - it was one single
patch that touched the "mm" subsystem".
(Also I'd appreciate a wording less strong than calling an aspect of
my work "a disaster". This is mostly just taste;
submitting-patches.rst is unspecific enough. And quite a few commits
contradict with your interpretation like 620943d7ee69
("include/linux/mmzone.h: clean up watermark accessors").)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists