From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (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 46B9558FD00 for ; Thu, 17 Sep 2026 14:29:13 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1789655354; cv=none; b=OF7au+9GEWo0+MzDc77wQVUQUSZLRM+mdfC3/XZpZxv1CU4jroiZsdMisyYab9QSpcbjPOC7e/+yZpYtfrm8O6UuuVr4H1hGS97xd6lx1/R6RiV7bRx6q0aoI5A/T+oLAlRs2N7FhGBAnZcOHpBUAAmdeh4s52EED03eIHmLuTk= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1789655354; c=relaxed/simple; bh=4LQwynQuWXkSgLfRcpqqvYT1wfxx3P9crY0UVZe9ABY=; h=From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Date: Message-Id; b=I2UUNYsmhY37U8tVon+JX5rOuoEcl81/MJW79KWh41aiHjylQcI7BvdtYRmgmsqCeehPchdLHGVNC/dlc9m9wYNSI0/fdQQnzbFCgmK6COFYPmkADwPbsLg795fWHru0mKjpJPWHvsDjsiEqNyVgb6V5lSNLvl732b937N+F9Z8= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=fIoBq0V6; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="fIoBq0V6" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 095C71F000FF; Thu, 17 Sep 2026 14:29:12 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1789655353; bh=z7AWmY2GkCLitTvPSdTo2VzZmoyqYddxaWF9Yan9vss=; h=From:Subject:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Date; b=fIoBq0V6o8vVUr7AePzdz5FOr7U78D8txfn+TDis+vUf5kLGI54AuzEPc3uqzddHx aSWYNrHRP/b6slkXKQ+NyLwMrP3FnMbASD/VOWuEMUe3b/hpDv4LpsCZ+xh77CltQe R2Q5vQHvslIXBr9maFGxP9tCUcLEftcX20Em/zuJK+yJxw7ntcf/p9KyM68R14lcJA 7CkCTMstTlWEyZnUXdQSTgCkV9ExYc6esQuR3BHwsSsqqr0udFtQ2ruaKRT87BPqfY kPQWKybvlcRIpHsgR9Xgp77dX5ou/hJgGODREq9V133K9LDw5Q7KOJqETiCDGvnIIg MJGcXEGIhYwSg== From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/10] mm/damon/core: set damon_ctx->walk_control_obsolete in damon_new_ctx() Reply-To: sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev To: "SJ Park" Cc: damon@lists.linux.dev In-Reply-To: <20260917142210.90829-5-sj@kernel.org> References: <20260917142210.90829-1-sj@kernel.org> <20260917142210.90829-5-sj@kernel.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2026 14:29:12 +0000 Message-Id: <20260917142913.095C71F000FF@smtp.kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: damon@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: > damos_walk() should be called for a damon_ctx context that has > successfully started at least once. That's because > damon_ctx->walk_control_obsolete is initialized when kdamond starts. If > the rule is violated, an indefinite wait can happen. There is no > existing violation of the rule. >=20 > damon_call() had a similar rule, and it turned out keeping the rule is > not easy for damon_call()'s case. Hence, commit 8023b5f47e09 > ("mm/damon/core: set ctx->call_controls_obsolete in damon_new_ctx()") > added the initialization in damon_new_ctx() and removed the rule. >=20 > Keeping the rule for damos_walk() is relatively easier. But having > slightly different rules for similar functions could be confusing. > Sashiko, for example, repeatedly asked questions about this. Do the > initialization of walk_control_obsolete in damon_new_ctx() for > consistency. >=20 > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/20260915011614.102342-1-sj@kernel.org >=20 > Signed-off-by: SJ Park Sashiko has reviewed this patch and found no issues. It looks great! --=20 Sashiko AI review =C2=B7 https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260917142210.9082= 9-1-sj@kernel.org?part=3D4