Messages in this thread | | | From | "Wang, Haiyue" <> | Subject | RE: [PATCH v6 1/2] mm: migration: fix the FOLL_GET failure on following huge page | Date | Wed, 17 Aug 2022 05:47:08 +0000 |
| |
> -----Original Message----- > From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> > Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2022 13:43 > To: Wang, Haiyue <haiyue.wang@intel.com> > Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; david@redhat.com; apopple@nvidia.com; > linmiaohe@huawei.com; Huang, Ying <ying.huang@intel.com>; songmuchun@bytedance.com; > naoya.horiguchi@linux.dev; alex.sierra@amd.com; Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com>; Vasily Gorbik > <gor@linux.ibm.com>; Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@linux.ibm.com>; Christian Borntraeger > <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>; Sven Schnelle <svens@linux.ibm.com>; Mike Kravetz > <mike.kravetz@oracle.com> > Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/2] mm: migration: fix the FOLL_GET failure on following huge page > > On Wed, 17 Aug 2022 03:31:37 +0000 "Wang, Haiyue" <haiyue.wang@intel.com> wrote: > > > > > } > > > > > > I would be better to fix this for real at those three client code sites? > > > > Then 5.19 will break for a while to wait for the final BIG patch ? > > If that's the proposal then your [1/2] should have had a cc:stable and > changelog words describing the plan for 6.0. > > But before we do that I'd like to see at least a prototype of the final > fixes to s390 and hugetlb, so we can assess those as preferable for
Got it, make sense. ;-)
> backporting. I don't think they'll be terribly intrusive or risky?
| |