From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 18D5522A7E4 for ; Sat, 6 Dec 2025 14:52:30 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1765032751; cv=none; b=BVQr3UgU1Yr8PTSj+sO/ie70Fcc/pzdAR3Lj9O0ToPSyDfCQD3UmPb5c0AOhUgar+1g6geXf3+PfaIbkVWKV/dPr+UxwRFPumbUt2RhMqEcI5yiYZi2SgSnIrVFtjoXSyh3K3XhjInzjHrSp/hxXE879TgnYShXfFZtT0Dc+56g= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1765032751; c=relaxed/simple; bh=SEbZ80lBXdpClEDzmIi3Wv7dns58zlOZQfMpHJXSaIM=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version; b=lRULPjBWXwsxVpJaQmT1RNayZKr7sSbeKyb4i3dU3YsYBHdi+sxe5sskKHeuMNWLvIBOagnhRMESi/gDG3D90LywTSx+CkgIvL5QphXO9IL9WbvBLUOXpxvCYEJl3q/gTJHJtrHRAi2ShDBXy1Nzw8vLmV9dl5oc1OXJy3uY63U= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=ikIe1NO4; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="ikIe1NO4" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 74272C4CEF5; Sat, 6 Dec 2025 14:52:30 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1765032750; bh=SEbZ80lBXdpClEDzmIi3Wv7dns58zlOZQfMpHJXSaIM=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=ikIe1NO4LSyNCV9jlh6K6+5Bb52VPYIF59Bem8EGre2R5FRW+JBRHmh73sdQ7V7l2 PME8Yzj3RduaGzq8CQThFLdmL5D3Id/Zuus6/W6B1zA7KHTeSFp+II93/LadudMZvW NU+hkmuoJXMYgmXHA5NTW0BUajtZXwdZ12xzx0k/aYb7f3f7LNSBEHmoq8Es39NylF 2K70Q6idaIL/A0tP0iVK/dzkOj7YVYmqFWAYItsP+JteyBpKYsZgmnDQZEEW8P0/ND fpI2uYrpRvIKpVlUU8UCR4FJMpWLATfS2wl9JEZpz/Q6qgId7Qnwr+vPPDl0fJv6c6 vTpcrMLlPpxLA== From: SeongJae Park To: Enze Li Cc: SeongJae Park , JaeJoon Jung , damon@lists.linux.dev, linux-mm@kvack.org, enze.li@gmx.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] mm/damon/stat: deduplicate intervals_goal setup in damon_stat_build_ctx() Date: Sat, 6 Dec 2025 06:52:21 -0800 Message-ID: <20251206145222.6302-1-sj@kernel.org> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.47.3 In-Reply-To: <924cfaa0-ad83-4d68-a6da-c1e8537b3232@kylinos.cn> References: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: damon@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On Sat, 6 Dec 2025 15:58:45 +0800 Enze Li wrote: > On 2025/12/6 12:17, JaeJoon Jung wrote: > > On Sat, 6 Dec 2025 at 10:50, SeongJae Park wrote: > >> > >> On Sat, 6 Dec 2025 10:17:13 +0900 JaeJoon Jung wrote: > >> > >>> The damon_stat_build_ctx() function sets the values of intervals_goal > >>> structure members. These values are applied to damon_ctx in > >>> damon_set_attrs(). However, It is resetting the values that were already > >>> applied previously to the same values. I suggest removing this code as it > >>> constitutes duplicate execution. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: JaeJoon Jung > >>> Reviewed-by: Enze Li > >> > >> I show Enze did suggest changes [1] to v2 of this patch. But I don't show Enze > >> gave Reviewed-by: tag to the patch. Am I missing something? > > > > I added "Reviewed-by: Enze". > > It is just minor commit message format suggestion. > > Am I putting too much emphasis on this? Reviewed-by: tags are kind of approval. Those should be offered by the reviewer. Please refert to the doc [1] for more details. [1] https://origin.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/submitting-patches.html#using-reported-by-tested-by-reviewed-by-suggested-by-and-fixes > > Should I delete "Reviewed-by: Enze"? Because Enze offered the tag below, no change is needed. > > I have carefully reviewed both the commit message and the code changes > in the patch, it looks good to me. > > Feel free to add, > > Reviewed-by: Enze Li Thank you for your review, Enze. Thanks, SJ [...]