From:   SeongJae Park <sj@kernel.org>
To:     Yu Zhao <yuzhao@google.com>
Cc:     SeongJae Park <sj@kernel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
        Hillf Danton <hdanton@sina.com>, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
        Jesse Barnes <jsbarnes@google.com>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
        Michael Larabel <Michael@michaellarabel.com>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
        Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
        Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
        Ying Huang <ying.huang@intel.com>,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        page-reclaim@google.com, x86@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 0/9] Multigenerational LRU Framework
Date:   Wed,  5 Jan 2022 11:25:27 +0000
Message-Id: <20220105112527.23399-1-sj@kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <YdV4k1+zEbtzmUkK@google.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, 5 Jan 2022 03:53:07 -0700 Yu Zhao <yuzhao@google.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Jan 05, 2022 at 08:55:34AM +0000, SeongJae Park wrote:
> > Hi Yu,
> > 
> > On Tue, 4 Jan 2022 13:22:19 -0700 Yu Zhao <yuzhao@google.com> wrote:
[...]
> > I think similar works are already available out of the box with the latest
> > mainline tree, though it might be suboptimal in some cases.
> 
> Ok, I will sound harsh because I hate it when people challenge facts
> while having no idea what they are talking about.
> 
> Our jobs are help the leadership make best decisions by providing them
> with facts, not feeding them crap.

I was using the word "similar", to represent this is only for a rough concept
level similarity, rather than detailed facts.  But, seems it was not enough,
sorry.  Anyway, I will not talk more and thus disturb you having the important
discussion with leaders here, as you are asking.

> 
> Don't get me wrong -- you are welcome to start another thread and have
> a casual discussion with me. But this thread is not for that; it's for
> the leadership and stakeholder to make a decision. Check who are in
> "To" and "Cc" and what my request is.

Haha.  Ok, good luck for you.


Thanks,
SJ

[...]