From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from out-177.mta1.migadu.com (out-177.mta1.migadu.com [95.215.58.177]) (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 8027941C71 for ; Fri, 24 Apr 2026 01:31:36 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=95.215.58.177 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1776994298; cv=none; b=EOUE6Y0O6H526bZqFpG5cFzCt+cpEzJUXjdW+4apyAAp/u72sy+Loxgs59F/HWslLKYpbQdnZTSixTKkLeLGeHlypMqVRvMdnvABPODI4cO3wtr8P57FTIVL11nQ5Q5ayVxtUdY2bBozW4G8gAZIvuFXeTQmxAdsiXl5d+qgLKQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1776994298; c=relaxed/simple; bh=/CZsYzL7FiUaap0Zezv0hM4EPym3OQbyrrCdLMfTuYw=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version: Content-Type; b=JtOCUtjMF+rGIhssZN7xs7pUUQb468BeBBfIoFE6hTC3FhmOMYq6QZ0DpwEocCQ4VinuhOzs+puWX54QAVxWmLktWXf4OazY49MXVWaOCIMNP8bUo4p5mPLXxjRE5nbBihND3pCGvnBvyW2cgNggCv9+PfxYf3sEHYi4R7W2+So= 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=qh8aY4EA; arc=none smtp.client-ip=95.215.58.177 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="qh8aY4EA" 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=1776994294; 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; bh=/CZsYzL7FiUaap0Zezv0hM4EPym3OQbyrrCdLMfTuYw=; b=qh8aY4EAjYKRn+jdJkra9YnQNlON6MFRdoUjFONw5GtDaz0N9we2LhzquYENy3I/RDeawK foNbED3nr9c0F/wLq8vnhn68F9HE6vUXhedBPrOxZD6URTFUYtLawCwN1hjCu68iLILAmq YD24FHiSmPlWIzCzkKmFpOZPy+1ywjw= From: Roman Gushchin To: Jakub Kicinski Cc: kuba@kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Paolo Abeni , Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Networking deletions for 7.1 In-Reply-To: <20260423235422.1541768-1-kuba@kernel.org> Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2026 01:31:00 +0000 Message-ID: <7ia4se8lb0vf.fsf@castle.c.googlers.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT 2c on Sashiko: 1) I'm working on an infrastructure to separate pre-existing issues from new issues. My current thinking is to stop reporting these issues with reviews of new patches and instead put them into some database and give maintainers access to it. Sashiko will automatically deduplicate issues and index them by the source file/subsystem. Hopefully it will mean that maintainers will see only a limited number of issues in source files they support. But I have yet to see how it works in practice. But I'm somewhat concerned that this way many of these issues will remain there forever and by reporting them with new material we actually have better chances to get them fixes. Maybe it should be configurable per-subsystem. I'm very open for ideas here. 2) Re false positives vs finding more bugs I had the same experience. It's easy to tweak it to be more conservative or creative, but it comes at a price. It seems like the real answer is simple a better model. We saw a big improvement internally switching from Gemini Pro 3.0 to 3.1. Thanks