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 358071AAE28; Sun, 29 Mar 2026 19:32:28 +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=1774812748; cv=none; b=HkBgaPje9VC5SMdI+fyJXwK3nYA5ecC93TbsFlEjUms6jwHY/fn4YW2BRHHhxJnrupIlYWI96Vp2aKFSSovVD8NI72zL8AfiuYCMAXEKhbcV+JQqzp7f3pWmCzcSUXSdEfuZG96DxaZpYpkahAK2N99RavLjz0NZ4LS6Dr8TnBs= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1774812748; c=relaxed/simple; bh=GidK0k6cqcWgrzXgE0fU2eP8/imjAJ8bcJ7Zp2Lqr5g=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version; b=TeN+d6RJ/c7ji0iGZUhJKCNA3HqFqKs3BXM1IDbhOYCapKjQI8PIoB9R3Ncp3fSoLI4dM3ZzD0GyI7bLciv3Xd/FoQFnpRfWBcbbiOh2OkM7//V5GzTSrH9yLIgTzi1kaElSKSXBCs9ftSXq5ZyfAA4yQHTfvjCyGTqNsl2HIFg= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=ncKYXgRy; 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="ncKYXgRy" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BD943C116C6; Sun, 29 Mar 2026 19:32:27 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1774812748; bh=GidK0k6cqcWgrzXgE0fU2eP8/imjAJ8bcJ7Zp2Lqr5g=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=ncKYXgRyzWHynpOrDPnHrj+O6t9H6BeAxrX059m1yw2sgIDmrmPGb+/TUNE2fRvWn O3BEIdceoCWej4V7yLD6l6L6Rm8anVlCQGTp/1XQA9w62BAbIGaDRetS8IuFa63p9K IAo4yIe5dX/iuaqQHHuVDwrBwxm/Pf9G1XaDiil7YbwGsC6StWtGDwjYHOV6x0zTmd UVL4f7889EAORb/JXtscFG/m90EQ5IAeVKOjrAUE3ku7oFPBJTghiQx5QuqBGX55iT F9EyHtUY3myDQewG3geUgCzNu8Heb9UTgKPwKsRMTltmEA6pvtFqgb4w6xtXBRV4KY fUoxN1oiV5pJw== From: SeongJae Park To: Greg KH Cc: SeongJae Park , Andrew Morton , "Liam R. Howlett" , "# 5 . 19 . x" , David Hildenbrand , Jonathan Corbet , Lorenzo Stoakes , Michal Hocko , Mike Rapoport , Shuah Khan , Suren Baghdasaryan , Vlastimil Babka , damon@lists.linux.dev, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Roman Gushchin Subject: Re: (sashiko status) [PATCH 0/2] Docs/admin-guide/mm/damon: warn commit_inputs vs other params race Date: Sun, 29 Mar 2026 12:32:26 -0700 Message-ID: <20260329193226.59025-1-sj@kernel.org> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.47.3 In-Reply-To: <2026032915-library-embolism-b48c@gregkh> References: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit + Roman for a case he has any opinion about my sashiko usage. Hello Greg, On Sun, 29 Mar 2026 20:05:53 +0200 Greg KH wrote: > On Sun, Mar 29, 2026 at 08:49:16AM -0700, SeongJae Park wrote: > > Forwarding sashiko.dev review status for this thread. > > > > # review url: https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260329153052.46657-1-sj@kernel.org > > Why are you doing this? If we want to see the review, can't we just go > and look at the tool itself? We can. But it is bit cumbersome to opening web browser and moving my focus to there. Reading everything on the mailing tool is easier for some people like me. Like some test bots send reports are replying to patches, or we sometimes forwarding bugzilla reports to mailing lists in a form of a plain text mail. Secondly, I have to share my opinions about the reviews, as many times AI reviews need human's opinions. There is no good way to do that on the web ui of the tool (sashiko) for now, and I think this mail based flow is the best. And anyway I'm supposed to share at least my review of AI reviews, in mm community. If I ignore, I will only make Andrew have to reply asking that. I used to share only my review of the AI reviews as replies, instead of forwarding AI reviews and then replies to those. But it was 1. cumbersome for me (should summarize AI review and then my review; feeling doing work twice), and 2. feeling not optimal at sharing all concerning comments with others. My summary might miss some points of AI review but other reviewers might just believe me and don't read the full review due to the additional web browser opening work. Also some other reivewers might kindly review AI reviews before I do, and save my (or their) time. Hence I ended up to do this bit odd workflow: Forwarding the full AI review on the mailing list first, then reply my responses. > sending it back to all of us feels odd, If this is polluting your inbox and/or distract you, I'm so sorry for that. Please let me know if this is distracting you. Maybe I can filtering people who don't want this kind of replies out of the recipients for the forwarding mails. Or, if you have a suggestion about what need to be changed, please let me know. > especially when it is your own patches. Unfortuantely sashiko cannot send email on its own (yet). So I'm doing that until it can. > > confused, I hope my above explanation helps you. Thanks, SJ [...]