From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from out-188.mta0.migadu.com (out-188.mta0.migadu.com [91.218.175.188]) (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 4A6C91E9919 for ; Sun, 22 Mar 2026 02:12:23 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=91.218.175.188 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1774145545; cv=none; b=l6UsviL76CRvcf9JKLVAuDEaljZ4yxuSm6xYS7/4W2URRhB5YNqz+iOawXjnj5AF15ckBsYYRkFRNw2y9dDbSVfn79N0RpgsFysqrHnOq0eIF+y9cgi+9tP8Bg+E3RIm1Lw89nwQQytSfOfBgcbinq15NJDTVriqYm96ninUBIs= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1774145545; c=relaxed/simple; bh=I9rXDSrb0y/+odiVb5ry3q+WVLiLpjJfcdO5ilNzUP8=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=slsEIzUVIA9M/w1BZe0/oGqA1eLhNkeyfeU15m2lDCF9qHSyUd6R5QE9V101tnJmtP21MEHMkqzA9eVJ6iuEEEfnHMJrdEmSt/BaVhJlOSeM4N6G5+ccnDw43OlAp30x3Af2edJIh96/+xBMe/VI9Yd2vMRbsVJkmTNmmU4/1AE= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b=bIlwVrpZ; arc=none smtp.client-ip=91.218.175.188 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b="bIlwVrpZ" X-Report-Abuse: Please report any abuse attempt to abuse@migadu.com and include these headers. DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.dev; s=key1; t=1774145540; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=5HwOS5UWtX1uofgITxSgtXLu1Y+5Vb3l6nTgVjZoF7o=; b=bIlwVrpZgwKTjX1twNUexAN00+lD3J1Z+rL7CGbyF7NulKDtEJyGU+BdSPGzD99QJmU8Q5 u8y847Qkh95VnhrO9p4VD0/vhn2VHTMOAT/y/26Xne/n8QAqbglIvianiZgEhIi6dbNT5l yV/rGi5pzFiPC9d4XvkIy6/KGCvx7ic= From: Roman Gushchin To: Andrew Morton Cc: "Lorenzo Stoakes (Oracle)" , David Hildenbrand , Zi Yan , Baolin Wang , "Liam R . Howlett" , Nico Pache , Ryan Roberts , Dev Jain , Barry Song , Lance Yang , Vlastimil Babka , Mike Rapoport , Suren Baghdasaryan , Michal Hocko , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/9] mm/huge_memory: refactor zap_huge_pmd() In-Reply-To: <20260321171530.8b3e8207f89d5a7384b9f01f@linux-foundation.org> (Andrew Morton's message of "Sat, 21 Mar 2026 17:15:30 -0700") References: <20260319200917.ce345a369d035050b6329ac5@linux-foundation.org> <87tsu9kgv3.fsf@linux.dev> <20260320203311.715ed75bcd84c18d24894324@linux-foundation.org> <20260321171530.8b3e8207f89d5a7384b9f01f@linux-foundation.org> Date: Sat, 21 Mar 2026 19:12:13 -0700 Message-ID: <877br4k3ya.fsf@linux.dev> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT Andrew Morton writes: > On Fri, 20 Mar 2026 20:33:11 -0700 Andrew Morton wrote: > >> A lot of patchsets are "failed to apply". What is Sashiko trying to >> apply MM patches to? It would take some smarts to apply the v2 >> patchset when v1 is presently in mm.git? > > ? It's displayed in the Baseline section for every patchset. For mm patchsets if the base commit is not specified it's mm-new then mm-unstable then mm-stable then linux-next/HEAD and then linus/HEAD (and now I think that it should not only show HEAD, but the actual sha). I don't have yet support for "previous version is applied, let's revert it and try the new one" case. Something to add later. > The way things are going at present, I'm just not going to apply a > series which Sashiko "failed to apply". And that's cool, I'll just > wait for a version which Sashiko was able to apply. And then not > apply unless all Sashiko questions are resolved or convincingly refuted. > > Question please: if Sashiko finds an "issue" in v3 and then v4 comes > out with changelog words which justifies the questionable alteration, can > Sashiko parse that changelog justification and think "OK, never mind"? Yes, I'm planning to add it. Sashiko will have an access to previous versions of the patchset and the whole discussion thread and take it into the account. Thanks!