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 3C5AA26A0A7; Thu, 21 Aug 2025 05:43:51 +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=1755755032; cv=none; b=LThSR7y5dLch9284U0hgGC/+FzPasE4/Bmd9WRmY0IU+XbbSm3mMrMb1yP+F4CLk65ZE0OdyQNun8q3JDTjhZO0EsrKv0mz83SYikRBoxxTDPUP+/a3yK2afjTK6napx7+rQpUpnuQKZdE1wjWDIbxpKB70w4dYsNdOfzwZ/5Io= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1755755032; c=relaxed/simple; bh=wslDGFckcPcpSuCYM0gIHtwPLeSyL94Zl1WSFhikYZQ=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-Id:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=jmyGr/09ec1XJ2OxWsjuFk1VX4uAZTH/VlCQeeE1vQubYHHFYmRn5LQwRZZrH4XgAO2LMGgbIcq8yGWYcCHI7xZmwJA3qVxiSfC7phVHFfw54lf5IDQTDQ0xBE5yEmrhrA0A93FTYYdt6yt6AOb+aJhfbD1p32iXYhAG8LELuT4= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=MKOLoolX; 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="MKOLoolX" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 95591C4CEED; Thu, 21 Aug 2025 05:43:51 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1755755031; bh=wslDGFckcPcpSuCYM0gIHtwPLeSyL94Zl1WSFhikYZQ=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=MKOLoolXYQgU4+4/ayOBQeg1NhhN6jqhwTGUyHdOP5KYTBJEoUR2DHP8JdwoR6Iax NdPTTkxgSgUpVVrgtDLfUTcC3V/v/hk40V9cUE9A4hUT8u+rNxC0X+DZQwb4EWji9J 4eAeiL+vrgMnaY49yxWDn2dYRAZXz3q44PAEPbuYcOapOsFpyBfp9NsRAIVtyLiJ8z 217tSLRuV0G3S01ystBbpw+fJXf4BLTX/wNEJJtyeOYZB6hqcHMlPmllkW49HuHWf4 IlZYyjypoz91OyMSs+vXrQ5iIXrn815UBENGVewk9kxwMlBzIQPDJSyaTNzemYBuAT QxzXYs/D8bLXA== From: SeongJae Park To: SeongJae Park Cc: Sang-Heon Jeon , honggyu.kim@sk.com, damon@lists.linux.dev, linux-mm@kvack.org, stable@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mm/damon/core: set quota->charged_from to jiffies at first charge window Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2025 22:43:49 -0700 Message-Id: <20250821054350.53849-1-sj@kernel.org> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.39.5 In-Reply-To: <20250821054148.53746-1-sj@kernel.org> References: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: stable@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On Wed, 20 Aug 2025 22:41:48 -0700 SeongJae Park wrote: > On Thu, 21 Aug 2025 13:29:04 +0900 Sang-Heon Jeon wrote: > > > On Thu, Aug 21, 2025 at 11:54 AM SeongJae Park wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, 21 Aug 2025 10:08:03 +0900 Sang-Heon Jeon wrote: > > > > > > > On Thu, Aug 21, 2025 at 3:27 AM SeongJae Park wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, 20 Aug 2025 22:18:53 +0900 Sang-Heon Jeon wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hello, SeongJae > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 20, 2025 at 2:27 AM SeongJae Park wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, 20 Aug 2025 00:01:23 +0900 Sang-Heon Jeon wrote: > > > [...] > > > > I think that I checked about user impact already but it should be > > > > insufficient. As you said, I should discuss it first. Anyway, the > > > > whole thing is my mistake. I'm really so sorry. > > > > > > Everyone makes mistakes. You don't need to apologize. > > > > > > > > > > > So, Would it be better to send an RFC patch even now, instead of > > > > asking on this email thread? (I'll make next v3 patch with RFC tag, > > > > it's not question of v3 direction and just about remained question on > > > > this email thread) > > > > > > If you unsure something and there is no reason to send a patch without a > > > discussion for the point, please discuss first. To be honest I don't > > > understand the above question at all. > > > > Ah, I just mean that I need to make a new RFC patch instead of > > replying to this email thread. > > Why? > > > I'll just keep asking about previous > > comments on this email thread. > > You said you will send a new patch instead of replying here, and then now you > are saying you will keep aking to this thread. > > I'm confused. > > [...] > > Ok, I think this discussion is going unnecessarily deep and only wasting our > time at clarifying intention of past sentence. Meanwhile apparently you > understood my major points. To repeat, please clarify what is the problem and > user impacts, when and how it happens, and why the solution solves it. > > Let's restart. Could you please rewrite the commit log for this patch and send > the draft as a reply to this? > > We can further discuss on the new draft if it has more things to improve. And > once the discussion is finalized, you can post v4 of this patch with the > updated commit message. s/v4/v3/ Sorry for the typo. Thanks, SJ [...]