Re: [PATCH] hugetlb: add cond_resched() to __unmap_hugepage_range()

[Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>]

On Tue, 18 Aug 2026 20:21:37 +0200 "David Hildenbrand (Arm)" <david@kernel.org> wrote:

> >>>  		if (!ptep) {
> >>>  			address |= last_addr_mask;
> >>
> >> As Michal just put it:
> >>
> >> "PREEMPT_NONE is effectivelly dead and most cond_resched will/should be
> >> removed. Is there any reason why you are not using full preemption when
> >> requiring low latencies?"
> >>
> >> https://lore.kernel.org/r/aoRnUxUlgf_kRlm8@tiehlicka
> > 
> > That's pretty bad behavior and we might want to fix it in earlier
> > kernels.  Is PREEMPT_NONE effectively dead in 6.18.x and its
> > existing users?
> > 
> > If yes, we do want to fix older kernels then we should merge this.
> > 
> 
> Okay, but that would be stable-only fixes?

Not understanding.

Maybe you refer to adding a patch to -stable but not to -linus?  That's
against the -stable rules
(Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst).