Hi Joonas, First of all, I sincerely apologize for my very late reply, and thank you for taking the time to raise these concerns.
I have read your message carefully. Your criticism is justified, not only regarding this particular patch, but also regarding the way I have been submitting patches to the kernel community. For this patch, I failed to properly assess the severity and scope of the issue before submitting it. This is a selftest-only cleanup, and it should never have been marked for stable backporting. I also failed to pay sufficient attention to the subsystem's coding conventions and teardown ordering. These are things I should have checked myself before asking maintainers to review the change. I have revisited the relevant code and revised the patch to address these issues. The v2 removes the Fixes and stable tags, corrects the subject prefix, and adjusts the cleanup ordering. I understand that correcting these details now does not excuse the lack of care in the original submission. I also want to be transparent about the use of AI tools. The initial finding came from static analysis, and I used DeepSeek and GPT 6.1 Sol to help examine the finding and prepare the patch. However, I was the one who decided to submit it, and I am fully responsible for its correctness, testing, and presentation. Using these tools does not reduce that responsibility, and I should not have submitted a patch without sufficient independent verification. More importantly, I owe you and the other maintainers an apology for my broader submission practices. I submitted far too many patches in a short period of time without giving each one the attention it deserved. I also failed to respond to review comments and requests for changes, including requests to acknowledge AI assistance. I understand how frustrating this must have been, especially when maintainers are spending their own limited time reviewing contributions. You were right to question whether I was taking the review process seriously. Looking back at how I handled those submissions, I can understand why they gave that impression. I regret that my actions wasted maintainers' time and undermined their trust in my contributions. I am changing how I approach kernel contributions. I will stop submitting patches in bulk, review outstanding feedback individually, and prioritize resolving existing discussions over sending new patches. Going forward, I will submit changes only after I have examined the relevant code paths, checked the subsystem conventions, and performed appropriate validation. I will also make sure that any AI assistance is properly acknowledged. I understand that trust cannot be restored simply by writing an apology. It will take consistent care and follow-through in future contributions, and I intend to demonstrate that through my actions. I have prepared a revised version of this patch, but I also understand if you do not consider this particular cleanup worth pursuing. I will respect that decision and will not continue pushing it if you would prefer to leave it aside. Thank you again for your feedback, and I am genuinely sorry for the unnecessary review burden and for not responding sooner. Regards, Wentao
