On Tue, 6 Jan 2026 18:24:10 +0000 Lorenzo Stoakes <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 06, 2026 at 10:12:49AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Tue, 6 Jan 2026 11:51:49 +0000 Lorenzo Stoakes > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > I'm not sure if the git repos are lagging vs. quilt, but as reported this > > > patch breaks the VMA tests, and the tests are _still_ broken. > > > > > > Yet it's still in mm-new, mm-unstable, and even mm-hotfixes-unstable. > > > > > > This is interfering with my work, can we please drop this. > > > > > > Also the v3 is currently being debated, so surely should have been dropped > > > until we have this resolved? > > > > Well. I don't drop fixes unless it's decided to be a non-issue or > > unless a better fix is available. > > Even if it breaks the build and that's been reported on-list? I addressed that. > > > > I've done this for ever - I've held onto "wrong" fixes for *years*. > > View this as a weird issue-tracking system for a project which has no > > issue-tracking system. It's to prevent issues from falling through > > cracks and getting lost. > > I think a lot of the issue is these processes seem to work to you but those > on the ground are finding them not to work. > > The kernel today is not the same as the kernel X years ago, esp. in terms > of sheer volume. > > Having a patch that none of the relevant maintainers/reviewers have seen > land in an -rc out of the blue is a really serious problem. It isn't in -rc. It's in mm-hotfixes-unstable and it's marked "acks?", which means not to go upstream without further consideration. > Also it was taken 2 months after it was submitted, so nobody could have > _possibly_ picked this up by reading the list. This is why I am really > underlining this case. That's why I grabbed it. Had I not done so, this issue would have been lost. What I do *worked*. > > > > It's unfortunate that this one causes disruption so I guess I'll loudly > > comment it out and track the issue that way. > > > > I think we need a better approach, yes. > > We in mm are really very responsive compared to most, I think asking people > to wait and resend if somehow it got missed is considerably saner than > 'well I'll take any patch purporting to be a fix from anyone so we keep > track of stuff'. If someone wants to step up and be MM issue tracking person then great. I don't want to be that person. And let me reiterate: had I not done this, the issue Mikulas identified would have remained unaddressed.
