Re: [PATCH v6] mm/hugetlb: ignore hugepage kernel args if hugepages are unsupported

From: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: SeongJae Park <sj@kernel.org>,
	"David Hildenbrand (Red Hat)" <david@kernel.org>,
	"Ritesh Harjani (IBM)" <ritesh.list@gmail.com>,
	Sourabh Jain <sourabhjain@linux.ibm.com>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
	Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>,
	Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Madhavan Srinivasan <maddy@linux.ibm.com>,
	Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
	Muchun Song <muchun.song@linux.dev>,
	Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Vasily Gorbik <gor@linux.ibm.com>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
	linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org,
	linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6] mm/hugetlb: ignore hugepage kernel args if hugepages are unsupported
Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2025 12:11:51 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <aUrNVyuSaQrQLGZP@laps> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251223085434.a6d6ae08c3aedf420908f404@linux-foundation.org>

On Tue, Dec 23, 2025 at 08:54:34AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
>On Tue, 23 Dec 2025 06:43:45 -0500 Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org> wrote:
>
>> >> > Yes, -stable maintainers have been asked to only backport patches where
>> >> > the MM developers asked for that, with cc:stable.  There may be
>> >> > slipups, but as far as I know this is working.
>> >> >
>> >> > I don't actually know how they determine which patches need this
>> >> > special treatment.  Pathname?  Signed-off-by:akpm?
>> >>
>> >> I guess it is pathname, based on ignore_list file [1] of stable-queue repo.
>> >>
>> >> [1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git/tree/ignore_list#n16
>> >>
>> >
>> >Oh, that's a bit sad.
>> >
>> >- other trees sometimes mess with mm/ and they probably aren't aware
>> >  that they need an explicit cc:stable.
>> >
>> >- misses drivers/block/zram and probably various other things that
>> >  the MM team maintains.
>> >
>> >Oh well, I guess simple mm/* coverage is good enough.  But I do worry a
>> >little that useful fixes coming into mm/ via other trees without
>> >cc:stable will get missed.
>>
>> How should we improve the filter? mm/ AND signed off by akpm?
>
>I think just signed-off-by:akpm please.  That way, mm fixes which come
>in via other trees without cc:stable get backported.

Ack

>Obviously we'd prefer that such patches get appropriate consideration
>by the MM developers but sometimes other-tree people aren't that
>cooperative.  In this case it's better to backport the thing rather
>than missing a fix?

I tend to err on the side of taking one extra thing rather than missing
something :)

Would you be interested in trying out AUTOSEL for mm/ again? In the current
workflow I give about 2-3 weeks for review, and all it takes to have a patch
dropped is to just reply with a "no".

I can generate a series with mm/ patches from v6.18..v6.19-rc2 that don't have
a Fixes/stable tag but the LLM thinks that it should be backported as a way for
you and other mm/ folk to gauge the current state of AUTOSEL, if that helps?

-- 
Thanks,
Sasha