[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200416184924.GN1068@sasha-vm>
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2020 14:49:24 -0400
From: Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
To: Edward Cree <ecree@...arflare.com>
Cc: Or Gerlitz <gerlitz.or@...il.com>,
Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Netdev List <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...lanox.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH AUTOSEL 4.9 09/26] net/mlx5e: Init ethtool steering for
representors
On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 05:06:46PM +0100, Edward Cree wrote:
>On 16/04/2020 01:00, Sasha Levin wrote:
>> I'd maybe point out that the selection process is based on a neural
>> network which knows about the existence of a Fixes tag in a commit.
>>
>> It does exactly what you're describing, but also taking a bunch more
>> factors into it's desicion process ("panic"? "oops"? "overflow"? etc).
>Yeah, that's why I found it odd that you were responding in a way that
> _looked like_ classic confusion of P(A|B) and P(B|A). I just wanted
> to make sure we had that common ground before launching into a long
> Bayesian explanation.
Just a question while I process your explanation (thanks for doing it!):
wouldn't this be done by the neural network?
It learns what a stable worthy commit is (and what isn't), and applies
weights based on these findings, right? So if it learns that most
non-stable commits don't have a fixes tag, it's likely to use that and
"require" other inputs to have enough weight to compensate over a
missing fixes tag so that it'll pass the threshold, no?
--
Thanks,
Sasha
Powered by blists - more mailing lists