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 072FF31E838 for ; Fri, 21 Aug 2026 13:43:33 +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=1787319815; cv=none; b=jZItikB35LriHx8d7mOEorGlVOu39LNrW91HNIMOmIZehHzDIuOQNBeAcnbW11uA7qqHFDjQhf8rBUKL4EVBhJnzzEGzP2l+kq8Dgb0bQAb0GNk4lRhMifayQ8gYAKSZC9rWJRzu1vHlwum69pLvHsCcdVKVSoEvoeqiGZF9T9c= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1787319815; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Aquc0vxWZALAjqgmKU3O8fgPD+LqPPKkZjDpVR5CRnU=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=rDfo5z+UkXGlWd0/3sD9nS5tlUBBSeAskD3dDpLB6AqJVP3pe4rQb5lJ6q88Pf+gfRaGWSJQs7uBMLfFSnqx2sEGmbazuDIips/sCMg679DWDQ5lXXUVz2smBFvumPpMHBOhtBjECNzOycqYHt+0BVuRQtwt85dFbm2sQ1bsBq0= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=Nl/WZpMa; 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="Nl/WZpMa" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D28EB1F000E9; Fri, 21 Aug 2026 13:43:29 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1787319813; bh=Aquc0vxWZALAjqgmKU3O8fgPD+LqPPKkZjDpVR5CRnU=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=Nl/WZpMa0B7PsT1RI21yHaF56mr0V6/CEKrQ6/hWFNAG089oya1jhdHQGgciMfAnp RkzC+fzQxwP/mNwdypDjgO5xT7LMSw+WxgzYFlZutpkdjwtybpl3cVCYLluLnFLlsD T1hbeqtPc9HnYpIBuTo9SI3MjOxr+O7VJggB+B5aNBg4DYLhPE4e8eA8no0PZD+ZmF Igi2o3mcJ1gzXnTjh1KACebRmk/xfS+cLozBfhep2xMDA5CmaPbMjhNMDwaqW+E7P2 InDKic7K3rLUMtEJO4JcE1tMGVNk0iaC7hXmnBvfXItGNgqx8up+pk67i6Z+0PmUOF mR9NTzhwUqyXw== Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2026 14:43:27 +0100 From: "Lorenzo Stoakes (ARM)" To: Michal Hocko Cc: Ridong Chen , Andrew Morton , Johannes Weiner , David Hildenbrand , Qi Zheng , Shakeel Butt , Kairui Song , Barry Song , Axel Rasmussen , Yuanchu Xie , Wei Xu , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ridong Chen , Roman Gushchin Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] mm/vmscan: honour node reclaim limits per type Message-ID: References: <20260821081741.1340277-1-ridong.chen@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; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Fri, Aug 21, 2026 at 01:26:57PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > Hey, do not get me wrong. I very much care about reviewers as well. I > merely wanted to say that we've had peaks of tool driven patches no > matter what. Things have eventually normalized but people need to be > educated about expectations of maintainers. Sashiko suggesting "but this > might need attention as well..." certainly contribute to more noise but > keep in mind that AI driven people are going to find a tool of their > choice to arm them with ideas to implement and post so focusing on > Sashiko is not going to help all that much. My main message is to > establish and enforce a notion that patches are going to be ignored if > they are not justified properly (even if they might seem technically > correct or fixing a theoretical problem). I couldn't agree more. We are, of course, furiously agreeing here :>) > -- > Michal Hocko > SUSE Labs -- Cheers, Lorenzo