Re: [PATCH mm-new v8 2/4] mm: khugepaged: refine scan progress number

[Lorenzo Stoakes (Oracle)]

On Wed, Mar 25, 2026 at 09:17:35AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Mar 2026 16:22:55 +0100 "David Hildenbrand (Arm)" <david@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > >
> > > Really larger stuff should be resent I think, esp. if there's multiple
> > > fixes in the series.
> > >
> > > A reply with the same-patch-but-with-fix-applied would definitely be
> > > useful!
> >
> > Right, for completeness, this is what we had in an off-list thread:
> >
> > "
> > Not sure if that's a problem for others, but I got the feeling that this
> > escalated a bit lately.
> >
> > I know, that we prefer fixups to sort out smaller stuff. So far so good.
> > In the last time there were some series where I was seriously completely
> > lost which state of the patches would go upstream, or what I should even
> > review, because there were just fixups over fixups.
> >
> > Fixups are nice, but for someone reviewing a series, too many fixups
> > (either as inline patch or even worse, as independent patches) just
> > causes a mess.
> >
> > It also gives the impression of "this is mostly done, so don't waste
> > your time reviewing it anymore." --- "just the finishing touches" ---
> > "don't jump in late and cause trouble".
> > "
>
> hm OK, so what to do.  We're OK with teeny -fixes but anything more
> substantial we ask for a full resend and I do the heres-what-changed
> reply?
>

Yeah that works for me.

> I presently don't fold the -fixes until the very last moment.  Could do
> that much earlier if it helps anything?  Possibly useful to people who
> are looking at the series in the mm.git tree.

It'd generally be easier imo to have those changes folded, but with something
added to the commit message to indicate this so I can know whether or not that
was folded in.

Maybe just directly squash the commits?

Thanks, Lorenzo