Re: [PATCH 00/11] mm/damon: introduce DAMOS failed region quota charge ratio

[David Hildenbrand (Arm)]

On 5/1/26 03:56, SeongJae Park wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Apr 2026 08:24:24 -0700 SeongJae Park <sj@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
>> Hello Andrew,
>>
>> On Tue, 28 Apr 2026 07:48:37 -0700 Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Add, thanks.
>>>
>>> As mentioned provately, Sashiko claims to have found things which it
>>> didn't see in the RFC.
>>>
>>> 	https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260428013402.115171-1-sj@xxxxxxxxxx
>>
>> TL; DR: I find no blocker for this patch series from the Sashiko reviews.
>>
>> Now sashiko replies its reviews for DAMON patches to authors and
>> damon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.  So I replied [1,2,3] my review of the reviews to those
>> on damon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx mailing list.  As I mentioned on the TL;DR, I find no
>> blocker for this series.
>>
>> And I think you didn't see those because those are sent to only authors and
>> damon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
>>
>> I nowadays reply-all to original recipients only if Sashiko found a blocker.  I
>> will also add short notice for non-RFC patches if Sashiko found zero issue.
> 
> ... Now I think the short notice is only redundant and silly, as the full
> review is available on damon@ list and the one who primarily interested in
> (Andrew) understands that.  I feel like the short-notice reply-all only
> increase unnecessary traffic and my redundant typing.  I will not do the short
> notice broadcasting, unless someone makes a diffeernt voice.

For Damon Andrew should for now just trust your ACKs. If it has your ACK, it's
good to go.

In the future, I expect you would pick up the patches yourself, which is where
you as the component maintainer would look for any blockers.

So for Damon patches I don't think we need the AI review notices from Andrew.

-- 
Cheers,

David