linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/7] vma count: fixes, test and improvements

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <0c068e35-0954-43fd-b3b3-20786a6a12fe@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2025 14:07:09 +0200
From: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To: Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com>,
 Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Kalesh Singh <kaleshsingh@...gle.com>, minchan@...nel.org,
 Liam.Howlett@...cle.com, rppt@...nel.org, pfalcato@...e.de,
 kernel-team@...roid.com, android-mm@...gle.com,
 Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
 Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
 Kees Cook <kees@...nel.org>, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
 Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
 Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Masami Hiramatsu
 <mhiramat@...nel.org>, Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
 Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
 Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
 Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
 Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>, Ben Segall
 <bsegall@...gle.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
 Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>, Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
 Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
 linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/7] vma count: fixes, test and improvements

On 18.09.25 12:29, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 17, 2025 at 04:32:31PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
>> On Wed, 17 Sep 2025 06:36:34 +0100 Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>>>> Perhaps being less accepting of patches during merge window is one aspect,
>>>>> as the merge window leading up to this cycle was almost the same review
>>>>> load as when the cycle started.
>>>>
>>>> I'm having trouble understanding what you said here?
>>>
>>> Sorry, what I mean to say is that in mm we're pretty open to taking stuff in the
>>> merge window, esp. now we have mm-new.
>>>
>>> And last merge window my review load felt similar to during a cycle, which
>>> was kind of crazy.
>>>
>>> So I wonder if we should be less accommodating and simply say 'sorry it's
>>> the merge window, no submissions accepted'?
>>
>> hm, I always have a lot of emails piled up by the time mm-stable gets
>> merged upstream.  That ~1 week between "we merged" and "-rc1" is a nice
>> time to go through that material and add it to mm-new.  I think it
>> smooths things out.  I mean, this is peak time for people to be
>> considering the new material?
> 
> I'm confused, why is the merge window a good time to consider new material?
> 
> People have the entirety of the cycle to submit new material, and they do
> so.

My view is that if you are sending a cleanup/feature during the merge 
window you cannot expect a fast reply, and you should not keep sending 
new versions in that timeframe expecting that all people you CCed that 
should have a look actually did have a look.

-- 
Cheers

David / dhildenb