Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 6 Sep 2022 17:10:48 -0700 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2] mm: use mem_map_offset instead of mem_map_next |
| |
On Tue, 6 Sep 2022 10:07:03 -0700 Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com> wrote:
> On 09/05/22 06:09, Cheng Li wrote: > > To handle discontiguity case, mem_map_next() has a parameter named > > `offset`. As a function caller, one would be confused why "get > > next entry" needs a parameter named "offset". The other drawback of > > mem_map_next() is that the callers must take care of the map between > > parameter "iter" and "offset", otherwise we may get an hole or > > duplication during iteration. So we use mem_map_offset instead of > > mem_map_next. > > > > Signed-off-by: Cheng Li <lic121@chinatelecom.cn> > > Fixes: 69d177c2fc70 ("hugetlbfs: handle pages higher order than MAX_ORDER") > > The Fixes tag implies there is a user visible bug. I do not believe this is > the case here. Is there a user visible bug?
A Fixes: with a cc:stable would indicate a user-visible bug. But IMO a bare Fixes: is simply a when-to-stop guide to backporters - a convenience. And, I suppose, it has some documentation benefit.
And if people are really that interested, they can read the dang changelog ;)
| |