public inbox for linux-mm@kvack.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Liew Rui Yan <aethernet65535@gmail.com>
To: sj@kernel.org
Cc: aethernet65535@gmail.com, damon@lists.linux.dev, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/damon: validate addr_unit to be power of 2
Date: Sun, 29 Mar 2026 02:43:19 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260328184319.13176-1-aethernet65535@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260328180629.55498-1-sj@kernel.org>

> Liew, I suggeted two options before.  But you are skipping providing your
> opinion to those, and adding yet more options.  That makes me difficult to
> follow the conversation.  Could you please answer to my suggestions and make a
> consensus about those, first?

Apologize if my previous email was unclear. Let me directly address your
two suggestion.

1. DAMON_SYSFS Type [1]:
   I fully agree with this. Centralizing the validation in
   damon_commit_ctx() is the right approach to avoid "whack-a-mole"
   problem. This is exactly what I am proposing.

2. Adding a simple check on existing validation logic (in callers?) [2]:
   While this is simpler to implement, I prefer avoiding it for the
   "whack-a-mole".

So, to clarify, I choose your first option (centralized check), and I
believe my "Option 2" is the simple way to implement it.

Does ths align with your expectation? If so, I will proceed with this
approach.

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/20260328132937.9580-1-sj@kernel.org
[2] https://lore.kernel.org/20260328141323.10540-1-sj@kernel.org
[3] https://lore.kernel.org/20260328174409.6786-1-aethernet65535@gmail.com

Best regards,
Rui Yan


  reply	other threads:[~2026-03-28 18:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-03-27  6:26 [PATCH] mm/damon: validate addr_unit to be power of 2 Liew Rui Yan
2026-03-27  6:45 ` Liew Rui Yan
2026-03-27 12:10   ` Liew Rui Yan
2026-03-27  8:11 ` (sashiko review) " Liew Rui Yan
2026-03-27  8:27   ` Liew Rui Yan
2026-03-27 14:14 ` SeongJae Park
2026-03-27 14:56   ` Liew Rui Yan
2026-03-28  0:14     ` SeongJae Park
2026-03-28  2:26       ` Liew Rui Yan
2026-03-28 13:29         ` SeongJae Park
2026-03-28 14:13           ` SeongJae Park
2026-03-28 17:44             ` Liew Rui Yan
2026-03-28 18:06               ` SeongJae Park
2026-03-28 18:43                 ` Liew Rui Yan [this message]
2026-03-29  3:20                   ` SeongJae Park
2026-03-29  7:51                     ` Liew Rui Yan
2026-03-29 15:15                       ` SeongJae Park

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20260328184319.13176-1-aethernet65535@gmail.com \
    --to=aethernet65535@gmail.com \
    --cc=damon@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=sj@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox