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 B8AAD1C68B6; Thu, 20 Mar 2025 20:52:57 +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=1742503977; cv=none; b=CuRxTKrn+TqdH6+o96QcFBSFMAWvrk0fQkA6GIfXy3O64DnQQmLWQ7pMJro3p4MrUnEzESfD7I3McepGcfQ6ZxxFZcANK7pklggm7rbO72owDtuEBXGgS+yFw+c7xe7TuowXHzkKdU7xiCC05F0opnZFJ6BOYSJ8AkYmAixb4hM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1742503977; c=relaxed/simple; bh=2gH4NmZgcqFsi7kx1+PzfuIhh7VfYK21h7LJTsqWt6w=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=aJljjr44Ro/t6OXZiuCY9mWrG7y28wttL4akbor0Qfr3Gxz70WeBXfJQvd3AClpeLhbl662Z+WmOEzx0CY5Ep8pxMnRwd29yl5bpHLVDx1VBXyJZKUlVN6IsbaKpItABhRUK+7ufPbrv4Mbtj/URZGiKnezMKvndwAbgj03uf3A= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linuxfoundation.org header.i=@linuxfoundation.org header.b=d76MStkt; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linuxfoundation.org header.i=@linuxfoundation.org header.b="d76MStkt" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BD7B0C4CEDD; Thu, 20 Mar 2025 20:52:56 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=linuxfoundation.org; s=korg; t=1742503977; bh=2gH4NmZgcqFsi7kx1+PzfuIhh7VfYK21h7LJTsqWt6w=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=d76MStkt4ak/8cB/z1RrKactlJRuQMgk4nKM0F4GtdKKHk1fylBdZN2ux4INxJ5tt 76KgifpoMwRnDvrvg3u1BR8CldkNs2k8N5OGx236T8ZjU5v9Y99uMYvaedtmPbYjx3 mU5RylxWkwHpWA3BC3JvFYjOeIrXRQl7VQRltgFY= Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2025 13:51:37 -0700 From: Greg KH To: Pasha Tatashin Cc: changyuanl@google.com, graf@amazon.com, rppt@kernel.org, rientjes@google.com, corbet@lwn.net, rdunlap@infradead.org, ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com, kanie@linux.alibaba.com, ojeda@kernel.org, aliceryhl@google.com, masahiroy@kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, tj@kernel.org, yoann.congal@smile.fr, mmaurer@google.com, roman.gushchin@linux.dev, chenridong@huawei.com, axboe@kernel.dk, mark.rutland@arm.com, jannh@google.com, vincent.guittot@linaro.org, hannes@cmpxchg.org, dan.j.williams@intel.com, david@redhat.com, joel.granados@kernel.org, rostedt@goodmis.org, anna.schumaker@oracle.com, song@kernel.org, zhangguopeng@kylinos.cn, linux@weissschuh.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com, bp@alien8.de, dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, x86@kernel.org, hpa@zytor.com, rafael@kernel.org, dakr@kernel.org, bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org, cw00.choi@samsung.com, myungjoo.ham@samsung.com, yesanishhere@gmail.com, Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com, quic_zijuhu@quicinc.com, aleksander.lobakin@intel.com, ira.weiny@intel.com, andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com, leon@kernel.org, lukas@wunner.de, bhelgaas@google.com, wagi@kernel.org, djeffery@redhat.com, stuart.w.hayes@gmail.com, jgowans@amazon.com, jgg@nvidia.com Subject: Re: [RFC v1 2/3] luo: dev_liveupdate: Add device live update infrastructure Message-ID: <2025032054-voltage-compactly-7774@gregkh> References: <20250320024011.2995837-1-pasha.tatashin@soleen.com> <20250320024011.2995837-3-pasha.tatashin@soleen.com> <2025032058-reassure-veneering-0fdb@gregkh> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Thu, Mar 20, 2025 at 02:03:10PM -0400, Pasha Tatashin wrote: > I absolutely agree that demonstrating a real use case is important. > However, this is a complicated project that involves changes in many > parts of the kernel, and we can't deliver everything in one large > patchset; it has to be divided and addressed incrementally. Ok, but then don't expect us to be able to actually review it in any sane way, sorry. Think about it from our side, what would you want to see if you had to review this type of thing? Remember, some of us get hundreds of things to review a week, we don't have context for each and every new feature, and your project does not have the "trust" in that we would even consider taking anything without any real user both in the kernel and in public userspace code. Breaking up changes in a way that is acceptable upstream is a tough task, usually harder than the original engineering effort to create the feature in the first place. But in the end, the result is a better solution as it will evolve and change along the way based on reviews and requirements from the different subsystems. good luck! greg k-h