From: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
To: Qian Cai <cai@lca.pw>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] mm/memory_hotplug: don't check the nid in find_(smallest|biggest)_section_pfn
Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2019 15:03:43 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <657e4a9d-767d-5140-a4f4-d963794cdf0c@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <F768F9E2-6413-437A-827F-6105D6DDCD94@lca.pw>
>>
>> But believe me, the world won't end if your on vacation for a couple of
>> weeks, even though some BUGs could sneak in ... e.g., lately I try to
>> review as much as I can on the MM list (and Michal is steadily watching
>> out as well).
>
> Sure, the world will still be running, but good luck on solely rely on reviewing with bare eyes before merging.
That's why we have linux-next and plenty of people playing with it
(including you and me for example).
>
>>
>> The solution to your problem is more review and testing, really. E.g.,
>> I'd be very happy if other developers would test their patches more
>> thoroughly and if there would be more review activity on the MM list in
>> general (my patches barely get any review ... and I sent a lot of fixes
>> lately).
>
> Of course, that helps but it is a culture that very difficult to change now. How many times I saw even high-profile developers proudly sent out patches labeled “no testing” explicitly and implicitly ?
>
That is a different story, and I do agree that we should be more careful
with such things. Personally, I test whatever I send upstream - as long
as there is a way for me to test. We can only change this culture slowly
- but frankly speaking "no small cleanups" is just the wrong approach to
this problem.
[...]
>> BTW: [1] mentions "unbalanced software development culture with regard
>> to quality vs quantity that supplies an endless stream of bugs". I don't
>> agree to this statement. There will *always* be an endless stream of
>> BUGs - and most of them come from new features and performance
>> improvements IMHO. To me, cleanups and refactorings are important tools
>> to improve the software quality (and reduce the code size). All we can
>> do is try to minimize the number of BUGs - e.g., via more code review,
>> manual testing, automatic testing, and by actually understanding the
>> code. Cleanups/refactorings can even fix undiscovered BUGs (e.g., latest
>> example is [2])
>
> Surely, most of people probably don’t care about those endless bugs because Linux is a monopoly in data center and open source and it is always like this since Linux was born as a hobby project.
>
Well, working for a distribution I do care a lot :)
Again, your work is highly appreciated, but you are trying to use a
questionable approach (limit code changes) to solve a fundamental
problem (people not testing stuff, lack of review).
--
Thanks,
David / dhildenb
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-11-28 14:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-11-27 17:41 [PATCH v1] mm/memory_hotplug: don't check the nid in find_(smallest|biggest)_section_pfn David Hildenbrand
2019-11-27 19:03 ` Qian Cai
2019-11-27 19:05 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-11-27 19:37 ` Qian Cai
2019-11-27 19:52 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-11-27 20:49 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-11-27 22:56 ` Qian Cai
2019-11-28 8:46 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-11-28 13:56 ` Qian Cai
2019-11-28 14:03 ` David Hildenbrand [this message]
2019-11-28 14:30 ` Qian Cai
2019-11-28 14:42 ` Michal Hocko
2019-11-28 14:52 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-11-28 15:29 ` Qian Cai
2019-11-28 15:31 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-11-28 17:31 ` Qian Cai
2019-11-28 15:46 ` Michal Hocko
2019-11-28 17:22 ` Qian Cai
2019-11-28 10:15 ` Michal Hocko
2019-11-28 13:52 ` Oscar Salvador
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=657e4a9d-767d-5140-a4f4-d963794cdf0c@redhat.com \
--to=david@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cai@lca.pw \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=osalvador@suse.de \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).