On Mon, Jun 24, 2025 at 00:00:00 +0000, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote: > Sorry if it seemed harsh, I appreciate the first patch can be difficult > (I still remember mine!) but hopefully it's clear the focus is on > getting things right technically and this is all :) > > Overall I think something more like a generalised test of > process_madvise() behaviour would be most valuable, as David suggested?
Thank you for your helpful and constructive feedback. I understand that getting things right technically is critical, and I really appreciate your guidance and encouragement as I work on my first patch. I will revise the patch based on the suggestion to generalize the test for `process_madvise()` behavior, as David proposed. Thanks again to everyone for the insightful comments and support! Best regards, wang lian
